Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Time to go?
Yesterday at 10:04 am by Slippy

» WTF - London 2018 (and maybe a little bit of 'nextgen')
Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:07 pm by AceofDeath

» Paris Masters 2018
Mon Nov 05, 2018 12:00 am by Daniel

» Why has American and Australian Tennis Declined?
Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:30 pm by bogbrush

» Basel and Vienna 2018
Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:24 pm by Jahu

» Wimbleodn adopts final set TBs
Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:43 pm by Emancipator

» ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.
Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:42 pm by Tenez

» Guerrilla, not gorilla, warfare: Fired tennis analyst who nearly died to have his day in court
Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:55 am by bogbrush

» How good is Stefanos Tsitsipas?
Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:11 am by Tenez

November 2018
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Calendar Calendar

Affiliates
free forum


ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by raiders_of_the_lost_ark on Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:32 am

Tenez,


Can you please define what is fitness in tennis? How do you know who is fittest?  I'm asking this coz I'm not sure we are on the same page with the definitions.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark

Posts : 3188
Join date : 2012-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by legendkillar on Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:41 am

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
legendkillar wrote:You cannot put a number on success and then say that's what being fit equates to. 

 I haven't put an exact number here but given the history of physical players and their success in tennis, a success range can be arrived to in my opinion. Chang, Hewitt and Murray according to me didn't have the game to win slams. But adding the physicality to their tennis strength provided them with some chance ( though limited as it would ). They made good of it. 

And this is what I've expressed.

But they did....

Two of them multi slam winners and former world number 1's. 

So not sure where you are going with this in your pursuit to lament Tenez's theory. You view on what game can't win slams isn't anywhere near as credible as Tenez's fitness theory.

legendkillar

Posts : 2508
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Jahu on Wed Oct 17, 2018 2:17 pm

Fed is eroding my liver with these losses. Expected at his age now but wtffff

Jahu

Posts : 3013
Join date : 2016-02-23
Location : Egg am Faaker See

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Tenez on Thu Oct 18, 2018 10:58 am

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Tenez,


Can you please define what is fitness in tennis? How do you know who is fittest?  I'm asking this coz I'm not sure we are on the same page with the definitions.
Fitter means being able to move better and longer than the opposition but also in the rare case of Nadal being able to ht the ball harder without tiring as much as others would.

two good examples are Nadal arriving on the scene at 17/18 with a fitness unseen. Listen to Coria describing his matches v 18yo Nadal. Also Djokovic was very fit prior to 2011..but suddenly he manages to up the bar even further and says it himself that he is very surprised how fit he has become thanks to his new regime. That extra fitness allows him to completely turn the table v Nadal.

That is what fitness s all about. Of course they can hit the ball over the net but that is not what separates them from the rest of the field.

That extra fitness gives them also an mental edge. It's basic tennis.

Tenez

Posts : 19550
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Tenez on Thu Oct 18, 2018 11:18 am

Jahu wrote:Fed is eroding my liver with these losses. Expected at his age now but wtffff

Yes and we will have to get used to it. I still look forward to see him in London as he could play the top 2 fresh. That's all there is to it really as I don't think he can win any tournament now.

Tenez

Posts : 19550
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by bogbrush on Thu Oct 18, 2018 11:58 am

The bar to him winning things now is Djokovic. He won Australia only 9 months ago.

bogbrush

Posts : 2449
Join date : 2015-03-30
Location : England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Tenez on Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:28 pm

Djoko, Coric, Anderson, the list is growing with relatively unspectacular players.

Tenez

Posts : 19550
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by raiders_of_the_lost_ark on Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:07 am

legendkillar wrote:
raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
legendkillar wrote:You cannot put a number on success and then say that's what being fit equates to. 

 I haven't put an exact number here but given the history of physical players and their success in tennis, a success range can be arrived to in my opinion. Chang, Hewitt and Murray according to me didn't have the game to win slams. But adding the physicality to their tennis strength provided them with some chance ( though limited as it would ). They made good of it. 

And this is what I've expressed.

But they did....

Two of them multi slam winners and former world number 1's. 

So not sure where you are going with this in your pursuit to lament Tenez's theory. You view on what game can't win slams isn't anywhere near as credible as Tenez's fitness theory.

LK, I didn't dispute their slams victories, I know they did it, multi slams wins and finals. I'm saying is their tennis skills didn't have enough to win slams. I can tell guys who had slam winning games but didn't win. Tsonga, Nalbandian, Coria, Rios to name some. Why?? They lacked something and they couldn't work enough on it.

Similarly the above 3 didn't have the game that would win slams. But they worked on what was needed. They chose to play solid instead of trying to be brilliant ( which they couldn't anyway), cut down their own errors, return as many balls as possible, try to make it difficult for the opponent. The key ingredient to this strategy is being extremely fit.

 But this strategy can't bring domination of the field and can bring limited success. The 3 are about limits to what this strategy can do.

 Only people with a great game can dominate.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark

Posts : 3188
Join date : 2012-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by bogbrush on Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:47 am

Tenez wrote:Djoko, Coric, Anderson, the list is growing with relatively unspectacular players.
It's been growing since 2007

bogbrush

Posts : 2449
Join date : 2015-03-30
Location : England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Jahu on Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:25 pm

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/1034577/Roger-Federer-injury-Swiss-Indoors-Basel-Open-Stan-Wawrinka-Filip-Krajinovic

ROGER FEDERER says he played through three months of the season with a wrist injury as he attempts to explain his recent poor form.


Jahu

Posts : 3013
Join date : 2016-02-23
Location : Egg am Faaker See

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by legendkillar on Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:51 pm

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
legendkillar wrote:You cannot put a number on success and then say that's what being fit equates to. 

 I haven't put an exact number here but given the history of physical players and their success in tennis, a success range can be arrived to in my opinion. Chang, Hewitt and Murray according to me didn't have the game to win slams. But adding the physicality to their tennis strength provided them with some chance ( though limited as it would ). They made good of it. 

And this is what I've expressed.

But they did....

Two of them multi slam winners and former world number 1's. 

So not sure where you are going with this in your pursuit to lament Tenez's theory. You view on what game can't win slams isn't anywhere near as credible as Tenez's fitness theory.

LK, I didn't dispute their slams victories, I know they did it, multi slams wins and finals. I'm saying is their tennis skills didn't have enough to win slams. I can tell guys who had slam winning games but didn't win. Tsonga, Nalbandian, Coria, Rios to name some. Why?? They lacked something and they couldn't work enough on it.

Similarly the above 3 didn't have the game that would win slams. But they worked on what was needed. They chose to play solid instead of trying to be brilliant ( which they couldn't anyway), cut down their own errors, return as many balls as possible, try to make it difficult for the opponent. The key ingredient to this strategy is being extremely fit.

 But this strategy can't bring domination of the field and can bring limited success. The 3 are about limits to what this strategy can do.

 Only people with a great game can dominate.

Djokovic doesn't have a great game. Sampras didn't have a great game. Let me bring this into context with a simple question to you. Would Djokovic have won anywhere near the number of titles he has without that high level of fitness?

Those you mentioned. Bar Nalby who was plagued by injuries, didn't have the mental fortitude to get the job done. It's that simple. Winners know how to win. Losers know how to fuck up the best advantages. It's a case of who has the killer instinct. 

You could argue you that great games dominate, however I'd argue the best player in the conditions often or not dominates.

legendkillar

Posts : 2508
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Tenez on Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:30 pm

Jahu wrote:https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/1034577/Roger-Federer-injury-Swiss-Indoors-Basel-Open-Stan-Wawrinka-Filip-Krajinovic

ROGER FEDERER says he played through three months of the season with a wrist injury as he attempts to explain his recent poor form.


Very interesting. It was clear the way he lost to Kevin there that he was not 100%.

Tenez

Posts : 19550
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by AceofDeath on Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:40 pm

Federers fh is really looking poor recently. So up and down. He won't be a threat for Basel/WTF if he keeps this kind of level. Is he close to retirement?

AceofDeath

Posts : 378
Join date : 2015-04-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Daniel on Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:15 am

Tenez wrote:
Jahu wrote:https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/1034577/Roger-Federer-injury-Swiss-Indoors-Basel-Open-Stan-Wawrinka-Filip-Krajinovic

ROGER FEDERER says he played through three months of the season with a wrist injury as he attempts to explain his recent poor form.








Very interesting. It was clear the way he lost to Kevin there that he was not 100%.

You're as bad as the Nadal fans. It's this simple:  If he wasn't fit to play, he wouldn't have.  Fitness is a part of the sport.  Also, the Express is generally full of shit when it comes to tennis.

Daniel

Posts : 3642
Join date : 2013-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Tenez on Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:42 pm

Daniel wrote:
Tenez wrote:
Jahu wrote:https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/1034577/Roger-Federer-injury-Swiss-Indoors-Basel-Open-Stan-Wawrinka-Filip-Krajinovic

ROGER FEDERER says he played through three months of the season with a wrist injury as he attempts to explain his recent poor form.










Very interesting. It was clear the way he lost to Kevin there that he was not 100%.

You're as bad as the Nadal fans. It's this simple:  If he wasn't fit to play, he wouldn't have.  Fitness is a part of the sport.  Also, the Express is generally full of shit when it comes to tennis.
What should I start?

Tenez

Posts : 19550
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum