STATE OF THE GAME SHOULD TAKE BLAME FOR QUIETER TENNIS FORUMS

[N2D2L]

Looking at forums now, I do notice a trend that they're becoming quieter and certainly less debates. Maybe it's all to do with my little break, but actually I think it's more likely to do with the state of the game.

Firstly both Federer and Nadal are not really threats anymore at major tournaments. Even injury problems aside, that really is the case.
Whatever people think of Federer and Nadal individually, no one can deny that they brought in huge passions, for and against. This meant many debates, and livened up tennis forums.
In fact lately I've probably agreed more than I've disagree on the state of tennis with ultra-Fed fans like FK- a sad sign for tennis forums!  

Secondly, young players frankly aren't that great. Thiem may have a SHBH, but he doesn't generate the power of Stan or have the finesse of Federer. His playing style is closer to Berlocq. Kyrgios can be fun and polarising, but his serve is so good and his return of serve is so bad that on some surfaces his matches are not really 'edge of your seat' for the most part.

Thirdly, we have Djokovic dominating, and the closest player to him atm is Andy Murray.
Now I like Murray a lot, I actually like his attitude on the whole, and think he can be good to watch.
If you compare him to Djokovic, shot for shot, he's not that much behind.
But his problem is when facing Djokovic he's a massive CUCK.
It's almost sad to watch. He just mentally folds for no reason. I bet if Djokovic asked Murray if he could have sex with Kim Sears on a day of a Grand Slam final, Murray would probably nod, put his head down, and then handcuff himself to the door of his bedroom after letting Djokovic in. He needs to get a bit tough.

Unless there's a real rivalry, or a young player has a real shot above 2% of winning a Slam, I don't see what new things tennis forums can expect to discuss. We'll just have to go back to old Fedal debates, or Tenez's theory of people improving until they're 70.

[Tenez]

It's almost sad to watch. He just mentally folds for no reason. I bet if Djokovic asked Murray if he could have sex with Kim Sears on a day of a Grand Slam final, Murray would probably nod, put his head down, and then handcuff himself to the door of his bedroom after letting Djokovic in. He needs to get a bit tough.

LOL! There is a market for cuckold.

But it's not that. It's much more simple. 2 long rallies are simply enough to set a clear and mutually admitted state of things. Murray did not melt in Rome. he knew he coudl win over b03 versus a tired Djoko. At the FO the situation is reverse. Murray gave his all in that first set and knew therre was not much left to beat Djoko. Murray doesn't have the shots to beat Djoko with winners....not many have in fact. Only a Stan on a great day. So since the winners don't play much role, it is down to fitness...and that's where it is very clear who is built to last. Nothing to do with mental fight.

Unless there's a real rivalry, or a young player has a real shot above 2% of winning a Slam, I don't see what new things tennis forums can expect to discuss. We'll just have to go back to old Fedal debates, or Tenez's theory of people improving until they're 70.

I like the way you are pushing the bar. 30 being now clearly a fact, you are now pushing it to far beyond. I was right wasn't I? Who thinks Rao, Nishi and Goffin are starting their decline nowadays? no-one!

[noleisthebest]

Donald,

Nole is a better player than Murray.
It's as simple as that.

The rest is pure propaganda.

[noleisthebest]

As for forums getting quieter...well...it's time for tribal tennis fans to start enjoying the actual game not just live off winning fix their favourite player is giving them.

I am sure we can all start fighting over anything...we don't need Fedal, although I admit that one was AWSOME!!!

The two in combination with blossoming of internet era and social networks took tennis's popularity to GOAT heights.

We can always dust good old Sampras off and dissect his overrated status..

[Veejay]

the truth is that djokovic and murray are simply no as popular as federer and nadal
they arent considered tennis royalty a-list celebrity tennis superstars
their matches are not blockbuster their matches only gte higher ratings more pr and publicity and  creates more debate if  they are either playing  federer or nadal
federer is loved and admired everywhere he goes,the way he plays the game is eye pleasing ,every time he steps onot court it creates a massive interest
the same can be said of nadal ,he has a die hard fanbase
the rivalry between the 2 players  was far more intense  cause of the polar opposite way they play the game
the fanbases are far more passionate when debating and supporting their player
murrays fanbse is mostly british,even having said that,his comments about the english football team made his very unpopular
he may have achieved more but i  dont think he is as loved as henman was because he isnt a gentleman ,he is too moody and arrogant
djokovics fanbase is mostly serbian,unlike murrya and nadal he has been  a pretty good ambassador for the sport,he always handles himself well on and off the court he has never been a bad loser but for some reason he just inst that loved
djokovic  has managed to hold all 4 majors at the same time but he hasnteven gotten an ounce of the praise or admiration had it been federer or nadal

[Tenez]

Well this is what Federer was saying back then. At first he coudl not understand Nadal's phenomena. He probably hated it to see the courts slowing down everywhere to allow him to reach slams finals elswhere than RG.. But he finally understood it was a good thing for tennis....

I personally think it was good for tennis popularity but bad for real tennis fans. They turned the sport into a real business show at the expense of the sport integrity.

At the end of the day, there is a higher price to pay for the shorter benefits. By encouraging the Nadal's game, we now have 3 nadals at the top and it is dead boring.

It's very tough for orgnaisers nowadays. They speed the courts slightly and it becomes an ace fest, they keep it as is and we are guaranteed of another Djoko/Murray final.

Awful really!

[noleisthebest]

I don't know what to think about this "popularity" thing...

Nole has featured in some epic matches, more than Federer and Nadal I think mainly because he was able to beat Nadal.


Definitely more than Murray, who didn't play in anything memorable.


I still can't see why Fedal was so popular...to me those matches were dull tennis wise, mainly as Nadal had only plan A, the one-dimensional CC FH scenario... bludgeon Federer's BH to death. I couldn't watch it at all.
Probably just the timing of Nadal's appearance and...everything else about him...

Nole-Murray match-up does not offer a contrast Fedal had, but their matches have become more watchable in the last year, as both attack more trying to put the ball past each other.

[noleisthebest]

Now...we have Kyrgios as the saviour of tennis. 

Who will be his antipode, Raonic?

Personally, I'd love to see Rublev emerge out of rubble and square off against Zverev.

[Jahu]

no no, we don't need any more russian tennis hopes, they will get banned soon enough for whatever pesticide.

Thiem, Zverev is enough to hope for in next 2 years to kick ass.

[raiders_of_the_lost_ark]

Both Federer and Nadal were able to amaze people in way not seen before. Some of the shots and passes Nadal could make and that too against the best-of-the best was definitely very exciting.

Djokovic was the 3rd best player for a very long time, and has developed an extremely balanced game. Bar mouvement, he isn't THE best at anything, but isn't far behind in anything either.

 He practically has not weakness which can be exploited. This lack of vulnerability is not  human trait. Vulnerability in a player is also embraced when it comes to fans. 

There is not surprise factor with Djokovic. Its like a clock-work doing the same thing over and over.

Murray is far worse than Djokovic. Again a mechanical and manufactured player but of lower quality. 

Neither players are great to watch. And if these 2 are the top-2 and by far and their matches are so predictable. Its no surprise people are losing interesting in talking about tennis.

This RG was the dullest RG in the last 15 years. Even 2004 wasn't as bad. I wasn't much into women's tennis but will definitely say I really enjoyed the women's finals of the last 2 slams, far more than mens.

Fed's dominance could have become boring, Djokovic's is far far worse.

[legendkillar]

Similarly the game is headed in the direction of 90's interest. People tire of repetition and more repetition. Sampras rarely had a rival and in any case Agassi would show up on the odd occasion to give Pete a match. Same with Fedal which wasn't much of a rivalry towards the end as we are seeing with Djokouarry.

The mindset for me is what bothers me about the game. Players playing not to lose rather than playing to win. That's why I hold a shred of hope for Thiem. Whenever his back is against the wall, he comes out fighting and going for his shots. Djokovic and Murray don't strike me as having the 'winning' mentality. They default to playing not to lose if faced with a streaky or more aggressive player or the opponent just folds and gift wraps the match.

Personality counts for a lot in my book too. These players just don't have it. There's nothing unique that makes me want to support these players. I feel player's tend to buy into a media created aura (even when it doesn't suit and clearly isn't a fit for them) and people see through that.

What I will say is that this isn't restricted to just tennis. I find other sports have such gaps which they themselves are struggling to fill.

I blame Thatcher!

[Veejay]

agree with the last 2 comments
the public are only ever really interested in seeing something they have never seen before and in both cases with nadal and federer thats exactly what they got
people alos want to see players achieving things that hasnt been done before
with regards to djokovic and murray-its all been seen and done before and unfortunately  for them when look at what they have achieved,most people are left feeling rather underwehlmed  or not relly impressed

[Tenez]

Personality counts for a lot in my book too. These players just don't have it. There's nothing unique that makes me want to support these players. I feel player's tend to buy into a media created aura (even when it doesn't suit and clearly isn't a fit for them) and people see through that.

What I will say is that this isn't restricted to just tennis. I find other sports have such gaps which they themselves are struggling to fill.

I blame Thatcher!

They don't have personality cause their game hasn't....or vice versa. Same thing. Fed'd personality is nothing special either but we can see the grace in his game and therefore see the grace in his persona. And it's not something only we see as it is something his competitors see as well.

With Djoko, Murray and Nadal I think it is a bit more controversial. There is not much grace in their game and persona. They are different I guess...

[noleisthebest]

Personality counts for a lot in my book too. These players just don't have it. There's nothing unique that makes me want to support these players. I feel player's tend to buy into a media created aura (even when it doesn't suit and clearly isn't a fit for them) and people see through that.

What I will say is that this isn't restricted to just tennis. I find other sports have such gaps which they themselves are struggling to fill.

I blame Thatcher!

They don't have personality cause their game hasn't....or vice versa. Same thing. Fed'd personality is nothing special either but we can see the grace in his game and therefore see the grace in his persona. And it's not something only we see as it is something his competitors see as well.

With Djoko, Murray and Nadal I think it is a bit more controversial. There is not much grace in their game and persona. They are different I guess...

Sorry, but this is nonsense!

Nole has a huge personality. I can't believe you are not able to see it.
The most intelligent and interesting player on the tour by far.

Even his fans are cool and a happy bunch!

The only reason players are "boring" now is because of PR. I don't approve of it, but then again, who is asking me...

I loved Nole when was more outspoken, in his younger days...

[Tenez]

Well they all have personality...but I meant interesting ones. Murray is grumpy teenager with a good sense of humour and Djoko is an upstart with also some humour.
....but do we care?

To be frank I never cared of Fed's persona either. I was only interested to read his comments about tennis.

[Jahu]

Anyone playing the nationalistic card for his fans, yet being a tax-avoiding Monaco resident, while sending a few thousands of $ a year to Serbia as charity gift, is a character-less person & a selfish git.


Anyway ever time Djoko wins, half of comments on Serbian News sites are: Pay taxes in Serbia 


But sure, being with a background what he is, and being Serbia's biggest export to the world, he is pretty much untouchable back home.

Ok back to topic now: We first had Nadal, the original power player who could run all day, than we had Djoko who could do same but with extra 1 hour of running, and than Murray who just filled the gap when Nadal could not run anymore and decided that the Gym & Muscles can withstand Djoko's stamina, which they can't.

So not much of a new thing happening last few years, not tying to belittle Djokos success, but it will always be tainted with relation to Feds aging, Nadal's body crashing and competition from young players totally nowhere.

Heck WTA has become more fun to watch, constant new players kicking ass, since that Serena dinosaur is going away slowly.

[noleisthebest]

Jahu, Nole has never been a power player.

[Jahu]

Sorry, meant more in a sense of a stamina 6h play, which sure takes power too.

Not in a sense of powerplay alla Delpo or Soderling or Stan as ball crushers.

Hope its clear now what powerplay I meant.

[legendkillar]

Personality counts for a lot in my book too. These players just don't have it. There's nothing unique that makes me want to support these players. I feel player's tend to buy into a media created aura (even when it doesn't suit and clearly isn't a fit for them) and people see through that.

What I will say is that this isn't restricted to just tennis. I find other sports have such gaps which they themselves are struggling to fill.

I blame Thatcher!

They don't have personality cause their game hasn't....or vice versa. Same thing. Fed'd personality is nothing special either but we can see the grace in his game and therefore see the grace in his persona. And it's not something only we see as it is something his competitors see as well.

With Djoko, Murray and Nadal I think it is a bit more controversial. There is not much grace in their game and persona. They are different I guess...

I am a bit meh whether to agree or not. I see what your saying and half agree.

I liked players personalities that just brought themselves back to humanity. Professional athletes by definition are an elite bunch and sometimes whether it be an outburst or chuntering comment that just brings them to life somewhat. I think that's lacking in today's game.

I get what you are saying with Federer, but I don't believe that say off court that his personality is all air and graces whilst churning out rose scented farts.

For me the ultimate sporting personality was Ballesteros. Someone with intense genius, but the human grace and touch that allowed him to shine through. I find sport is so far entrenched in professionalism that in some cases maybe the personality is driven out of them.

[noleisthebest]

For me, power players are those who muscle the ball and atm in top 10 it's Nadal, Murray & Thiem.
Stan's power comes more from timing he ball well, same as Cilic.

[Jahu]

Power is nothing without Control - Pirelli ad. 

[noleisthebest]

Yes, that's exactly what modern players are doing: hitting the ball as hard as possible with tons of spin to bring /control it in.

Nadal was a genius at that.

Murray is his true successor as he uses big muscles, too.

The difference is he does not move as well as Nadal, his shots are otherwise all better than Nadal's right now.
Even the FH.

[Jahu]

Yes, but while Nadal had that inner rage and self-control to win, Andy has more of a internal problems, fighting himself, shouting, screeming etc, which if it was helpful to him in a same way as when Djoko fires himself swearing, that would be ok, but it never helped Andy, just made him loose matches.

And I can't remember last time Andy turned around a losing GS match (not counting the Raonic Queens turnaround ) but a mega match where he came back from abyss. 

Its that element that has missed from Andy's arsenal, and that both Djoko and Nadal have it.

[noleisthebest]

I don't think Murray's problem is lack of fight, he is very shrewd, though and gives up only when he sees he can't win...

I was impressed in RG final, he fought to the end, hoping for Nole to crack somehow.

But that ain't gonna happen any more.
Boris has plugged that weak emotional hole in his psyche.

That's why Murray has now hired Lendl. And Fed Ljubicic.

They are all trying to unlock Nole's mind. To find the emotional crack.

[Veejay]

"I find sport is so far entrenched in professionalism that in some cases maybe the personality is driven out of them."

i think when you are proffesional ( in anything not just sport) youre expected to behave in a certain way,professiona behaviour would differ slightly from profession to profession but i think from an ethical  and manners point of view,its mostyl the same
for athletes at the top of the game whose lives are under the microscope on and off the court,its all about pr,you dont want to be seen ding or saying the wrong thing
but this is why i admire federer so much,he has always stayed true to himself and speaks his mind so you gte to see what his true personalities is like
where as someone like djokovic  who always says the right thing in press conferences,its harder to figure out what his personality is truely like
then you have a moron lke nadal who makes a fool out if himself every time he opens his mouth 

[Tenez]

"I find sport is so far entrenched in professionalism that in some cases maybe the personality is driven out of them."

i think when you are proffesional ( in anything not just sport) youre expected to behave in a certain way,professiona behaviour would differ slightly from profession to profession but i think from an ethical  and manners point of view,its mostyl the same
for athletes at the top of the game whose lives are under the microscope on and off the court,its all about pr,you dont want to be seen ding or saying the wrong thing
but this is why i admire federer so much,he has always stayed true to himself and speaks his mind so you gte to see what his true personalities is like
where as someone like djokovic  who always says the right thing in press conferences,its harder to figure out what his personality is truely like
then you have a moron lke nadal who makes a fool out if himself every time he opens his mouth 

Yes. Exactly. Professionalism is about getting the most successful (bringing most money). End of. And for that it is better to keep your emotions in check. Which they do very well ...until the last point is over and then they tear their shirts down.

[Tenez]

Ball bashers have no choice to be ball bashers. If conds were faster, they woudl not need to hit as hard and could add some control in it.

Unfortunatly what used to be a "great shot" is now returned with ease so those guys have to hit harder to get through. This is is what we are hopping to see with guys like Zverev and Thiem.

[N2D2L]

It's almost sad to watch. He just mentally folds for no reason. I bet if Djokovic asked Murray if he could have sex with Kim Sears on a day of a Grand Slam final, Murray would probably nod, put his head down, and then handcuff himself to the door of his bedroom after letting Djokovic in. He needs to get a bit tough.

LOL! There is a market for cuckold.

Haha! Clearly Tenez, I mean firstly we can start with the people who enjoy watching Murray Djokovic Slam matches...

But it's not that. It's much more simple. 2 long rallies are simply enough to set a clear and mutually admitted state of things. Murray did not melt in Rome. he knew he coudl win over b03 versus a tired Djoko. At the FO the situation is reverse. Murray gave his all in that first set and knew therre was not much left to beat Djoko. Murray doesn't have the shots to beat Djoko with winners....not many have in fact. Only a Stan on a great day. So since the winners don't play much role, it is down to fitness...and that's where it is very clear who is built to last. Nothing to do with mental fight.

What do others on this forum think about this?
I disagree, I think Djokovic is slightly fitter, but the main difference is in Murray's mental strength, he just disappears mentally for long periods in big matches.

[luvsports!]

I think you get "mentally stronger" when you can last longer and can cover the court better than your opponent.

Back when Murray won in '12 and '13 vs djoko for his slams. Was he mentally stronger then? Was Djoko mentally weaker then? Is mental strength a constant thing?

FOr me when you have those two elements I mentioned, mental strength is not as important. FOr you to go for it more with your shots, that is tougher and more draining.

[Jahu]

Luv, since you are a world famous author, can one be strong without mental strength?

Body would not work 6h playing a GS Final without your mind making it work, or I'm wrong?

Or is mental strength something that just gives you strength in tight situations and not needed when you are crushing someone.

[luvsports!]

Lol Jahu. 
I'm just saying someone's mental strength is significantly bolstered if they are fitter, faster and stronger than the rest.

[Jahu]

Agree there, compliments all necessary elements to succeed and a rare sight too.

[noleisthebest]

I would say, mental strength is a combination of confidence, perseverance and ability to control emotions.

If you can rule yourself, you are sorted!

[Jahu]

I like to be ruled & dominated, does that make me un-sorted or just a person with fine taste? 

[luvsports!]

[noleisthebest]

I like to be ruled & dominated, does that make me un-sorted or just a person with fine taste? 

I am glad I am not a man!

[Tenez]

Luv, since you are a world famous author, can one be strong without mental strength?

Body would not work 6h playing a GS Final without your mind making it work, or I'm wrong?

Or is mental strength something that just gives you strength in tight situations and not needed when you are crushing someone.

It's not about 6 hours running. It's about throwing 2 longs rallies and knowing you are coping with it better than your opponent. Knowing that even if you lose the first or second set, you might get the better of your opponent over 5 sets. That makes your mind so much stronger.

Lendl lost a few slams finals before realising that even though his shots were much better than Connors or others, he was too emotional and needed to be fitter to maintain his game at a higher level. When he got fitter he won 8 slams. He was a choker he eneded up winning more slams than McEnroe and Wilander by getting fitter.

But know fitness is even much more important. Noone can win a slam with great winners. That's a sad fact.

[raiders_of_the_lost_ark]

Some reasons I don't prefer watching Murray/Djokovic matches.

In critical situations like facing BPs, Murray and Djokovic easily fall back to their rallying ability and defensive skills, not going for risky shots.  They may not even look to take risk when having Break points, and rely on opponent missing them.

They can hit great winner but mostly when the pressure is less. 

This often makes them predictable, more so for Murray. And hence boring to watch. They rarely do anything new.

They have solid, play, nothing much vulnerable which also is boring to watch.

Murray's racquet motion and also his footwork is laboured. He covers great court area, but he doesn't float on court. 

Djokovic can bend/slide/stretch but I don't see that looks beautiful on a tennis player.

[Tenez]

Spot on on every point Rotla.

Djoko's volleys and smashes look ugly and fragile.

[Veejay]

"Murray's racquet motion and also his footwork is laboured. He covers great court area, but he doesn't float on court."

his movement and foot work looks incredibly lazy to me
just watch his serving motion in slow motion,its so lazy,he barely gets off the ground

[N2D2L]

Murray is the second best mover in the game at this moment in time, I don't know if it looks laboured or not, but he gets to balls and has decent footwork.

[N2D2L]

Regarding the Djokovic vs Murray rivalry:

Tenez, Luvsports; I would agree with both of you that stamina can help mental belief. If a player knows he has the fitness to outlast the opponent that gives them more options and they can come down from 2 sets down etc. And unlikely let's say 'serves' it's not something that can dip from match to match too much.

But I think there's something more mentally between Djokovic and Murray, I don't think it's just stamina and the mental belief it gives Djokovic.
Murray in Grand slam finals, tends to randomly disappear. Look at the Australian Open final last year. He even admitted after that match, he didn't run out of energy. It was a set all, he was leading by a break, and then he randomly played one poor game, started berating his box, and then could barely get anything in.
I think my point about Kim Sears and the bedroom in the OP is actually a great analogy for this.

[Tenez]

It's not only slams finals, it is every time he plays a better player....Djoko...and Federer.

[Tenez]

Before thus run of the last 2 years, Djoko also had a poor record in finals....losing 2 to Murray himself. Djoko's record has considerably improved with his fitness. 

However you want to look at it....fitness is key....look at your man....

[Sponsored content]