ATP 250: Thailand & Malaysian Open

Nice to see Gasquet playing a bit loose.

Very good turnaround from Gasquet. Absorbed all Greggy had to offer and then dispatched him in style.

Tomorrow, some nice matches coming up:

Simon -Monfils (get ready for a loooong one)
Tipsarevic-Verdasco (get ready for a loud and ugly one)
Tomic- Gasquet (get ready for the old bones to try and outfox the still confused Tomic)
Nieminen-Raonic (a must win for Raonic)

In Kuala Lumpur:

Ferrer - Sijsling could be intersting (never seen Sijsling)
Davydenko-NIshikori.....it's up to Davy to make it look good.

Simon -Monfils (get ready for a loooong one)

----
Oh God. This is indeed going to be tough on the viewers in the stadium. I hope the history they created in the below match isn't repeated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8iunyDh4ms

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Simon -Monfils (get ready for a loooong one)

----
Oh God. This is indeed going to be tough on the viewers in the stadium. I hope the history they created in the below match isn't repeated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8iunyDh4ms

all the huff and puff and it ended u 6:4 6:1

Still, it took them a good hour and 24 minutes! Look forward to watching Simon tomorrow.

Davydenko retired after losing the first set. Now this not going down well with me.

1. Either he is now too unfit to play, but just is being stubborn to persist on playing. But this looks less likely, if that had been he would have played through the whole match instead of retiring midway

2. He maybe injured but he is losing motivation and spirit to play on.

My take is option 2.

Davydenko injured showed some brilliance before his retirement. Shame he cannot string matches together nowadays. He really plays through some beautiful patches still but suddenly his form goes. Must be very frustrating.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Davydenko retired after losing the first set. Now this not going down well with me.

1. Either he is now too unfit to play, but just is being stubborn to persist on playing. But this looks less likely, if that had been he would have played through the whole match instead of retiring midway

2. He maybe injured but he is losing motivation and spirit to play on.

My take is option 2.

I think his games is really based on perfect timing which in turn requires perfect moving and regular play to fine tune his fragile game and get the confidence so important to his game. Without being 100% he simply cannot play close to what he can and that certainly must affect his mind too.

I don't think Davy is the most tenacious kind. He gives up too easily on himself and I've seen it many times.
Nishikori is the perfect player he'd tank against: persistent, grinding returning everything, if he had the slightest discomfort, Davy would pull out.
He isn't match fit and probably lacks a bit of confidence on top.

Still, nice to have him back.

Irina, keep that whip cracking

Nishi is very talented too. I would not say "grinding".

I was looking forward to this match and we had a few good rallies....but did not last much. The thing is that Davy was really injured and that is enough to want to pull out, so not much we can say about that.

I think it's stupid to start the first 2 matches at 12 and the other 2 at 7pm. It creates an unfair advantage.

I didn't see the match so can't talk about it, really.
Nishi strikes the ball well but is just glued to that base-line like his life depends on it.

I don't think I've ever seen him inside the court except to shake hands at the net.

Should draw on that kamikaze tradition a bit more, I think....

Gasquet and Tomic scrapping in the tie-break ... which Gasquet wins with a beautiful point.

Really nice to see Gasquet play inside the court.

Semi-final matches for tomorrow:

Simon-Tipsarevic
Nieminen-Gasquet

&

Nishikori-Monaco
Ferrer-Benneteau

I'd like to see Gasquet win a tournament. He hasn;t won one for a while. ....And doing it after being almost out v Dimi, that woudl be nice.

Even if there is something that annoys me about Gasquet, I still like something in his game.

Tenez wrote:I'd like to see Gasquet win a tournament. He hasn;t won one for a while. ....And doing it after being almost out v Dimi, that woudl be nice.

Even if there is something that annoys me about Gasquet, I still like something in his game.

The thing about Gasquet, when you watch him, you can relate to what he is doing, he does not look like he's from another planet.
I don't know if it's just me, but he is hitting his backhand a bit differently now, with his other arm not going out so much. More compact and nicer on the eye.

I'll have a better look tomorrow....didn't notice. But yes, certainly a player getting humanly exhausted...if not too often.

Raonic losing in QF against Nieminen . He isn't rising the way I though he should. Lacking confidence and the right approach. Some match experience also needed. And a new coach for certain.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Raonic losing in QF against Nieminen . He isn't rising the way I though he should. Lacking confidence and the right approach. Some match experience also needed. And a new coach for certain.

You can see why I said it was a must win for him.
He's hit the glass ceiling at the moment plus going in the wrong direction : he seems to have piled on extra muscle on his legs in particular and (and we know how hard it is to do it) but he is not using it to integrate it into his lighter movement, on the contrary, he seems to use it as a back-up for safe rallying.

He is at the crossroads with his game and progress at the moment: he either kills that coward inside (is that actually possible?) and starts playing a lot more aggressively , or at the very best he becomes another Marin Cilic(achievements , not game wise)

Just saw Simon beat Tipsarevic in straights . Would've loved to have seen that match as it seems that Simon is playing well. Hopefully the final tomorrow is not at 6AM

The problem with tall guys like Raonic and even Berdych is not so much their mouvement but time it takes for the nerves' pulses to run from head to arm and legs and back. They are usually to slow to pull the trigger first and therefore end up having to retrieve if the serve hasn't done the damage.

I thought while watching guys like Berdych or Ancic that it was due to lack of guts but I think it's simply their big frame.

Simon beating Tsip!!! Huurraaa!

Tenez wrote:Simon beating Tsip!!! Huurraaa!

You like Simon's game? Over Tipsarvic?

Tenez wrote:The problem with tall guys like Raonic and even Berdych is not so much their mouvement but time it takes for the nerves' pulses to run from head to arm and legs and back. They are usually to slow to pull the trigger first and therefore end up having to retrieve if the serve hasn't done the damage.

I would like you hear some insight into the above statement.I find it very unconvincing a reason.

The nerve impulses take less than a second to travel through the body.
Tenez, do you make this up as you go along?

The principle is however very logical. Whether that is the reason I am not 100% sure but 99.9%. But your moves on a tennis court come essentially from a combination of mental (what you want to do) and reflexes (not passing by your head: running for instance).

So if your members are 5% longer for instance, typically they would need at least 5% more time to be "set alight" the mouvement as the electric pulse that runs through nerves is usually a constant. Some however have better transmissions than others. In fact this is what makes teh genius of someone like Federer. It's simply the flux running his nerves are faster than the average player. You have to bear in mind that the pulse has to get to the muscle and then run the length of the muscle. Of course evolution has made this process an extremely rapid process but it's a meters(from 2 to 100 depending)/second process. A second is a huge time in tennis and when taking a decision the impulse has to go back and forth between head to body.

And then of course there is the dynamic needed to move a heavier body require considerably more energy than a lighter one. It works exactly like a cars (small and light v truck for instance).

That's why those tall guys do their best to get very muscular. It's to speed that moving body quicker....no different than adding horse power to a car.

Tenez, I don't agree with you here.
Bolt is 6'5 btw.

Amritia3ee wrote:The nerve impulses take less than a second to travel through the body.
Tenez, do you make this up as you go along?

Yes and in one second one runs 10m nowadays, so 1/10 of a second is the difference between being on the ball or not. A 100th of a second is what allows you to time the ball correctly or shanking it after having run the 10m.

Amritia3ee wrote:Tenez, I don't agree with you here.
Bolt is 6'5 btw.

Yes and he is famous for not being the fastest off the blocks. But unlike any other tall guy, this new generation of tall athletes have managed to put the muscles on that was not avaialble in the history of mankind so now having a big frame comes at an advantage cause yuo can "buy" huge muscles while your size becomes suddenly an advantage as it gives you longer strides.


And as I said running doesn't involve much of the impulse to go the brain. It's a long acquired reflex during the darwin evolution process.

So let's take Berdych and Ferrer.
Ferrer is faster, and has better movement.

Why do you think this is so? Reflexes, lower centre of gravity, more training??
I'm not really sure tbh.

Tenez wrote:The problem with tall guys like Raonic and even Berdych is not so much their mouvement but time it takes for the nerves' pulses to run from head to arm and legs and back. They are usually to slow to pull the trigger first and therefore end up having to retrieve if the serve hasn't done the damage.

I thought while watching guys like Berdych or Ancic that it was due to lack of guts but I think it's simply their big frame.

Yes, that is the difficulty for big players, the natural loss of athleticism due to their size, although there are some exceptions even in tennis eg. Cilic, who is quite agile and fluid for his size. Delpo is also not too bad and better than average but still behind the "shorter" athletes in the top 4.

Still, Raonic is less stiff in movement than Berdych but is not using that little bit of fluidity he does have to his advantage. Or maybe he has reached his limits and we are expecting too much from him.

It's hard for other players to match athletic ability and consistency of the top 4 players at the moment. They come naturally to Nole and Nadal (athleticism) Nadal tops it up with ridiculous levels of fitness and so does Murray whose fitness covers up for lack of natural athleticism.
Interesting topic to have them all in a table and compare their fitness, athleticism and stamina as these three have become such a major weapon in modern tennis.

Amritia3ee wrote:So let's take Berdych and Ferrer.
Ferrer is faster, and has better movement.

Why do you think this is so? Reflexes, lower centre of gravity, more training??
I'm not really sure tbh.

How do you know he is faster?
Ferrer does not strike me as being very athletic, more just ridiculously fit. Someone who runs on the treadmill while sleeping.
How would you measure their speed to find out, 100m sprint?
Would be interesting.

Well, we are having an all French final in Bangkok tomorrow

Simon vs Gasquet (9AM UK time)

Gasquet leading 5:0 in their head to head, which is a bit of a surprise. Should be a nice match as both players strike the ball very nicely and have different games.
I don't remember seeing them play against each other, so wonder if Gasquet plays Simon from the base line or inside the court more.

I hope to Simon lose his temper a bit as he is just so cute when he does !

In Kuala Lumpur,

Benneteau vs Monaco

An unexpected pair, as Ben dispatched Ferrer, and Monaco Nishikori.

Interestingly they have never played against each other before.

Amritia3ee wrote:So let's take Berdych and Ferrer.
Ferrer is faster, and has better movement.

Why do you think this is so? Reflexes, lower centre of gravity, more training??
I'm not really sure tbh.

It's a combination of thing. But certainly being smaller makes it easier to start off fast cause it requires less energy. That is the prime factor for sure but the time an electric impulse takes to travel has most likely some effect as well. I kind of remember that some long dinosaurs had a second nervous system at the tale to speed their reactions.

Tenez wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:So let's take Berdych and Ferrer.
Ferrer is faster, and has better movement.

Why do you think this is so? Reflexes, lower centre of gravity, more training??
I'm not really sure tbh.

It's a combination of thing. But certainly being smaller makes it easier to start off fast cause it requires less energy. That is the prime factor for sure but the time an electric impulse takes to travel has most likely some effect as well. I kind of remember that some long dinosaurs had a second nervous system at the tale to speed their reactions.

Yes, I agree with you that it's a combination of those few factors.
With the 'nerve impulses' thing you may be spot on that it's important.
I was thinking about Bolt, and he is a slow starter, and also once he started too early and got disqualified. (this shows that maybe he knew his reaction just from hearing the pistol may be slower than others). So it would make sense that because he is bigger it takes ever so slightly longer for him to get going, which is amplified on an athletics track.

noleisthebest wrote:
Cilic, who is quite agile and fluid for his size. Delpo is also not too bad and better than average but still behind the "shorter" athletes in the top 4.

MIchael Jordan is one I have in mind. He is a taller version of Federer's "electric" nerves.

If there was a biological definition of talent (sport wise) it would be the speed at which that impulse travels and the rate of nerves per muscle cells. Typically a nerve fiber stimulates a number of muscles cells and the closer the ratio is to 1, the more subtle and precise the move is. For instance the ratio is higher for our arms and forearms than for our legs cause we have better control of our arms and hands than our legs and feet.

It's hard for other players to match athletic ability and consistency of the top 4 players at the moment. They come naturally to Nole and Nadal (athleticism) Nadal tops it up with ridiculous levels of fitness and so does Murray whose fitness covers up for lack of natural athleticism.
Interesting topic to have them all in a table and compare their fitness, athleticism and stamina as these three have become such a major weapon in modern tennis.

They have more muscles in general than the other players, meaning also they control the ball better. You can see with Nadal's volleys and so with Murray able even stretched to control a flying ball 3m outside the trameline and pull a lob. I can do the same but with a pigpong bat and a 2g ball, certainly not with a tennis racquet.

Tenez wrote:

They have more muscles in general than the other players, meaning also they control the ball better. You can see with Nadal's volleys and so with Murray able even stretched to control a flying ball 3m outside the trameline and pull a lob. I can do the same but with a pigpong bat and a 2g ball, certainly not with a tennis racquet.

I thought your comparison of DBHanders vs SBHanders was really interesting, regarding the strength of core muscles, when I saw Nole live in O2 from close last year I was really staggered at his athleticism, particularly the way he combines it with that core ab strength on those "lost" balls he gets to and returns with vengeance.
I could never see that on TV before.
As for amount of muscles, i think Nole would kill for a few pounds on his upper body, I saw a photo of him recently standing next to his mum who is very slim and he does not look much bigger than her, which is . But at least he has those magic legs.
At least he doesn't have to carry a lot of weight around.

Tenez wrote:MIchael Jordan is one I have in mind. He is a taller version of Federer's "electric" nerves.

Michael Jordan was amazing, almost unbelievable physical specimen, interesting that you compare him to Federer, because to me he is a lot more similar to Nadal in his athleticism and flexibility yet he did have the crazy talent as well, there was nothing he could not do with that ball, a bit like Federer.

noleisthebest wrote:
At least he doesn't have to carry a lot of weight around.

Yes and that allows him to outlast a few players and saves his back from more troubles. He is still pretty muscly but not too much. His flexibility is his forte.

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:MIchael Jordan is one I have in mind. He is a taller version of Federer's "electric" nerves.

Michael Jordan was amazing, almost unbelievable physical specimen, interesting that you compare him to Federer, because to me he is a lot more similar to Nadal in his athleticism and flexibility yet he did have the crazy talent as well, there was nothing he could not do with that ball, a bit like Federer.

I am not a big fan of basketball but compared to the other players he was very "normal" size and weight wise. However it was lightening fast reflexes and move that really set him apart....afa I know.

I am not a basketball fan any more but used to be in Jordan's days.
Days without computer, internet, mobile phones and all other time consuming gismos .

His generation had some superb players incl "magic" Johnson, and although they played different positions and were fantastic, Jordan still managed to be in a league of his own.
he was so athletically able it was out of this world. when I say athletically, I mean in the most positive sense of the word. The guy could almost fly through the air twice as long as others.

He'd be the equivalent of Novak, Nadal and Federer's best combined in one if you can imagine it.
Totally crazy.

I don't see any basket ball so I won't be able to say much on Jordon or his talent. I'm still not sure about the electric pulse reason, but I'll leave it at that because I have no knowledge in that regard.

Biological science behind these things are difficult for me to understand. Biology was never an easy subject for me despite doing fairly well in the subject in school. Computer Science was far easier for me.

Gasquet taking the ball early!

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
Biological science behind these things are difficult for me to understand. Biology was never an easy subject for me despite doing fairly well in the subject in school. Computer Science was far easier for me.

Same thing though, it can be reduced to 0/I!

Gasquet seems to know how to handle Simon

Gigou does not look his normal self.

The French commentators are ridiculously biased towards Gasquet.

Gilles takes an injury TO.

Tenez, what's the that song they are playing now oooooh-ooooh oooh oooooo
I remember if from childhood!

Tenez wrote:The French commentators are ridiculously biased towards Gasquet.

I know. Are you listening to the Aussie ones....you should've heard them when Tomic played

Lovely to see tennis fans enjoying themselves in all corners of the Earth!