ATP 500/250 Dubai/Acapulco/Sao Paolo

Tenez wrote:It's bizarre how one of the greatest server of all time now can't win his serve...even against Rosol!

Nooooo!!!!
I'd better start watching!

Tenez wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:No, for the reasons I explained earlier in my longer post.

You think I believe you are in an open minded state of mind keen to change views?

If you can show me why I'm wrong, I am happy to change my view.
The fact is, the vast majority of players drop their ranking when they get above the age of 31 or so, apart from a few rare exceptions.

My post explained some of the reasons why this is the case, and as usual you are ignoring clear logic to stick to your far fetched theory.

noleisthebest wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

He was  best returner in the game  until the back injury last year.

Better than Djokovic or Murray?

Absolutely!
Don't you remember?
Nole's returning is very good, Murray is not bad, his BH return is his best shot on return,  but not a lot of variation other than that, probably quite overrated in fact, like the rest of his game.
Federer was sublime, always on the baseline, even with his SBH...that's quite something!

Federer's return has been probably one of the weakest parts of his game, and Djokovic has a considerably better return considering he is so elastic and can return with such depth.
To claim Federer has a better return of serve than Djokovic is ridiculous, even most Federer fans will probably disagree with you on that one?

Julia Santamaria wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:
There is no point trying to explain something you don't understand, it's better to admit you don't know something and try to understand it by reading/listening someone who does.

Absolutely, and why don't you follow your own advice then on that one?

I have, and as a result learnt a lot, and I still do. But I seem to be a bit more discerning in who I choose to learn from, unlike you it's not the BBC commentators and various Nadal fan clubs around the internet...

noleisthebest wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:
There is no point trying to explain something you don't understand, it's better to admit you don't know something and try to understand it by reading/listening someone who does.

Absolutely, and why don't you follow your own advice then on that one?

I have, and as a result learnt a lot, and I still do. But I seem to be a bit more discerning in who I choose to learn from,  unlike you it's not the BBC commentators and various Nadal fan clubs around the internet...

I certainly don't learn from either BBC commentators or any fan clubs, don't make ludicrous guesses.
The fact is I try to back what I say with logic and reasoning, while you are more likely to base your argument on an initial assumption you are correct, and thus say 'oh, you just don't understand do you.'

Typical Rosol being pushed into mistakes by taking the ball early. Something Nadal could not do as Rosol takes the ball even earlier than Nadal.

Julia Santamaria wrote:
I certainly don't learn from either BBC commentators or any fan clubs, so your examples are wrong I'm afraid.

You sound like you do...anyway, stick around Tenez, and you'll be fine

Julia Santamaria wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:No, for the reasons I explained earlier in my longer post.

You think I believe you are in an open minded state of mind keen to change views?

If you can show me why I'm wrong, I am happy to change my view.

You have a live demonstration of what I was saying regarding Federer/Kholi/Nadal v Rosol.....But you don't want to see it...You'll csall that "form fluctuation". the fact is despite fed's poor form someone like Rosol is very unlikely going to give him trouble. Nadal can only handle pace by standing further back...though hitting 1000s balls every day since the age of 5 certainly allows him to venture a bit more towards the baseline...but certainly not great yet, nor natural !

Julia Santamaria wrote:

Federer's return has been probably one of the weakest parts of his game, and Djokovic has a considerably better return considering he is so elastic and can return with such depth.
To claim Federer has a better return of serve than Djokovic is ridiculous, even most Federer fans will probably disagree with you on that one?

That's what lets you down, Amri, you are too worried about being right, for you being on a tennis forum is all about fighting against other "fans"...who cares bout that!!!
Being elastic is certainly an advantage, but in returning, you need timing and reflexes a lot more. Even Nadal can return serves with depth on clay by standing 10m behind the baseline like he did against Dolgopolov the other day...but why couldn't he do it against Rosol in Wimbledon?

Federer is going to suffer tomorrow v djokovic's returns. he'll probably get broken every single service game.

Tenez wrote:Federer is going to suffer tomorrow v djokovic's returns. he'll probably get broken every single service game.

I'm surprised Amri hasn't agreed with you on this one

He won't get broken every service game, but he'll be beaten comfortably.

noleisthebest wrote:
Being elastic is certainly an advantage, but in returning, you need timing and reflexes a lot more.

Yes, there are many things needed to be a good returner; but I think Djokovic is the best in the world and has been for a while.

Tenez wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:No, for the reasons I explained earlier in my longer post.

You think I believe you are in an open minded state of mind keen to change views?

If you can show me why I'm wrong, I am happy to change my view.

You have a live demonstration of what I was saying regarding Federer/Kholi/Nadal v Rosol.....But you don't want to see it...

I'm not trying to say match-up advantages simply don't exist, of course for Nadal a taller player with a DHBH is more likely to trouble him; however I think it's ridiculous to ignore the fact players form can change from match to match, especially Rosol who is very up and down.

Different players will match up differently depending on the player... and the better you are as a player the more percentage of players you will be a hard match up for.
If you add up all the 'match-ups' H2H you get the W/L ratio... and Nadal leads that.

Julia Santamaria wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:
Being elastic is certainly an advantage, but in returning, you need timing and reflexes a lot more.

Yes, there are many things needed to be a good returner; but I think Djokovic is the best in the world and has been for a while.

Current playing conditions definitely suit Nole better than Federer,  but he lost against Isner in 2012 IW SF, whereas Federer dealt with Isner no problem in the final the next day.
I hope for a good match tomorrow and I want to see good serving much more than good returning.

Shame it's not the final.

noleisthebest wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:
Being elastic is certainly an advantage, but in returning, you need timing and reflexes a lot more.

Yes, there are many things needed to be a good returner; but I think Djokovic is the best in the world and has been for a while.

Current playing conditions definitely suit Nole better than Federer,  but he lost against Isner in 2012 IW SF, whereas Federer dealt with Isner no problem in the final the next day.
I hope for a good match tomorrow and I want to see good serving much more than good returning.

Shame it's not the final.

Just because Djokovic lost to Isner does not mean he is not the best returner in the world, Djokovic played poorly that match on his groundstrokes.

Julia Santamaria wrote:
Just because Djokovic lost to Isner does not mean he is not the best returner in the world, Djokovic played poorly that match on his groundstrokes.

And why do you think that happened....let me guess, form fluctuation?

noleisthebest wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:
Just because Djokovic lost to Isner does not mean he is not the best returner in the world, Djokovic played poorly that match on his groundstrokes.

And why do you think that happened....let me guess, form fluctuation?

Yes?
Why are you saying it as if it's a wacky theory of mine, players don't just play a consistent level for every match during the year.

I don't think you are able to appreciate how difficult it is to return Isner's serve, who was serving really well during that tournament.
Let alone with a SBH.
Nole didn't lose that match because he had a bad day. It was a very close match.
If you understood his game, you'd know that, and you'd know exactly why he lost.

Just because commentators parrot about his returning non-stop and they don't parrot about Federer's returning at all, doesn't mean Nole lost the match to Isner because of "form fluctuation".

Isner played very well, but Djokovic was not at his best.
In tennis, which is a game of small margins, small difference in how you play especially on the crucial points can make a big difference.

Federer is a superb returner, but he's not as good as Djokovic at returning, and one loss to Isner doesn't change that.

I don't know how Simon managed to lose to Murray last night!
He destroyed Murray 6:1  in the 1st set, serves at 4:2 and 5:4.....

Dimitrov also beat Gulbis in 3 close sets, must have been a good match.

Match(es) of the day:

Djokovic - Federer 7 PM
&
Dimitrov - Murray

I'm getting v impressed with Dimitrov.  May finally have found a player to break the dominance of Nad Djok.. soon.

Ouahh...3rd point of the match only and Djoko has broken Federer's spirit thanks amazing scrapping skill and a net call!

It's a great match. Many great points!

Fed just about held his serve at 1/0 up in the 3rd set....worrying times....2/1 Fed.

Looks like I am the only one enjoying this match....

I too was. and Fed wins....             

Awesome match! Both played well, especially Fed in the last 2 sets!!

Oh Sphairy...you remembered you were part of OTF?

Welcome back.

Fed was actually unlucky to lose that 1st set. As I said he was rattled by the 3rd point of the match. Djoko played well for a set and a half then his form again dropped considerably...as he seemed to be scrapping too much.

In his typical manner Djoko suddenly started to produce real unexpected UEs. But having said that Federer was not playing with too much confidence either but was able to produce amazing shots on key pressure points....which makes him for me one of, if not, the mentally strongest player.

Amen to that!

The Goat strikes back!

Yes bizarre after those back worries v Stepanek.....really up and down. But I said that a few days ago that on form I still think he could beat anyone....and he just did.

Djoko was really trying to take the ball really early too.

Superb performance from Federer.
He can still play brilliant tennis, but he will do it less regularly now he is older.

When I saw Djokovic go 3-0 up, I though he would win in straights I'll be honest.

I've been out... Glad to see Ronnie and Fed did the business! Get in!

Time for some youtube!

FedererKing wrote:I've been out...  Glad to see Ronnie and Fed did the business!  Get in!

Time for some youtube!

Yeah...how old is Ronnie btw?

Ronnie and Phil Taylor are the only men that have really withstood father time. But snooker and darts are not a physical sports, and so the comparison simply doesn't hold any water. Ronnie and Taylor are also the greatest of all time in their sports. Hendry and even Davis succumbed to age.

Decline is far more apparent on physical health, and in physical sports, since age has a massive effect on bone density, muscle mass, injury recovery time, and numerous other health issues.


Have a look at players aged 28+ and how many Slams they won. Notice the pattern.

Julia Santamaria wrote:Superb performance from Federer.
He can still play brilliant tennis, but he will do it less regularly now he is older.

well the opposition is also much stiffer than in 2006!

Of course he is not going to run like a rabbit everywhere....and play all the matches like he used to. Already in 2006 he was saying he was playing too much. As said, past 28, players don't recover as easily from previous matches...but their tennis, that is shot making, reflexes and timing improves well into the 30s. It's what Lendl and Pete said and they know what they are talking about.

Tenez wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:Superb performance from Federer.
He can still play brilliant tennis, but he will do it less regularly now he is older.

well the opposition is also much stiffer than in 2006!

Yes that is true, it's not the weak era anymore.

FedererKing wrote:Ronnie and Phil Taylor are the only men that have really withstood father time. But snooker and darts are not a physical sports, and so the comparison simply doesn't hold any water.  Ronnie and Taylor are also the greatest of all time in their sports.  Hendry and even Davis succumbed to age.  

Decline is far more apparent on physical health, and in physical sports, since age has a massive effect on bone density, muscle mass, injury recovery time, and numerous other health issues.


Have a look at players aged 28+ and how many Slams they won.  Notice the pattern.

 
I agree snooker and darts are not physical sports...but cycling is....and the average age of winners of the TDF is 32 I believe. The reason why snooker players were not doing well over time cause it's a sport....like tennis for long time which became more and more competitive, so the new generation kept pushing the older one essentially down to more youngsters taking on the game, better technique and equipment.
 
Tennis is a skilled and physical sport....so in my view a player reaches his best level between 29/32..maybe later for some. Do you really think Stan, Berdych, Gasquet, Djoko, Nadal, Tsonga are going to decline from now? They all keep improving..otherwise, they'd be all out of the top 10 next year if they were not!

Julia Santamaria wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Julia Santamaria wrote:Superb performance from Federer.
He can still play brilliant tennis, but he will do it less regularly now he is older.

well the opposition is also much stiffer than in 2006!

Yes that is true, it's not the weak era anymore.

yes physically..but talentwise I am afraid, the better players like Safin, Agassi, Nalbandian, Blake, Coria, etc.....have all retired now. Nowadays it's all about muscling the ball and doing splits to reach unretrievable balls.

Cycling does not use anywhere near the same muscles as tennis (and it's not as harsh on multiple body parts).  Tennis is a totally different game.  Look at the stats relating to tennis.  How many multiple slam winners played better past 27?  How many won more past 27?  I don't think you'll find one.  Federer has won far less, Laver won far less, Borg retired, Mcenroe won far less...  the evidence is overwhelming.

Federer is second oldest winner of Wimbledon. Surely you must see that it is no coincidence?

FedererKing wrote: Look at the stats relating to tennis.  How many multiple slam winners played better past 27?  How many won more past 27?

I think I explained that. You are ignoring the fact that since the open era, essentially thanks to money prizes, there has been a constant increase in competition and then technology advance.

If you take the period before where the same players kept on playing the tour with hardly any change in technology, winning a slam at 30 was more the norm than at 25!

“Well, great to him for coming back in the match. Congratulations,” said Djokovic. “He deserved to win. He played in the second part of the match better and was more aggressive and played all around the court really well.

“You know, I dropped the service game in the third set, opening game, was quite bad service game for me. I started making a lot of unforced errors in second part of second set and wasn't just managing to move as well, and he felt that this is his opportunity, and he used it. You know, that's why he's a big champion.”
===================================================

Yes that was obvious.

You could see the daring spirit grow throughout the match, and the surging will to win and the belief.  Very interesting to watch.  Federer used to shake off errors so easily that we hardly noticed them.  Then the doubt and pain crept in.  Now we watch expecting problems and worry until the last point is played.  Can this change?

I can't help myself, I want to watch him every time - but it has become about watching Roger and hoping it turns into watching amazing tennis.  And sometimes it gets unbearable.  I abandoned him during the Olympics semi-final, took the dog out to Cape Split and tried to forget, came back and found the match still on.  Such a roller coaster.

Tenez, you're right about the mental strength.  Roger is tough as nails and yet looks fragile, lithe and airy.  He knows when he is really there, and he doubles down.  And he knows when his body can't do it and doesn't kill himself for nothing.  The in between situation is the telling one, when he can smack his opponent with something unbelievable and take charge out of nowhere.  No other player is as thrilling to watch.

Isn't it amazing that his tennis has amazed us for more than a decade and still amazes us as if it is first time we watch him play.
 
If we look at all other players, we tend to get used to the wow effect after a few years. Look at Pete's serve, Safin's BH, Agassi's early taking of the ball...all those amazing shots kind of lost most of the wow effect as more players could hit as good a serve as Pete, as good a BH as Safin and now for instance 2 other players can retrieve as well as Nadal....
 
But none has bettered Federer's top game for the last 10 years....oh except himself of course.

That's your opinion Tenez, I still prefer watching Nadal play.

Great win for Roger.  Just watched the match - he played really well but it has to be said that Nole kind of gifted him the first two breaks.

This is the first time since 2006 (before he turned 19) that Nole is entering March with no tournament win in the season.  I suppose it is too early to attribute this change in his fortunes to Becker's influence?

oh, and  Grigor

And Grigor does it!....the hard way though. He covered apparently 10% more ground than Murray even, according to stats...though it did not look that way from end of second set which is when I started to watch. There was a crucial point in the first TB where he made Murray run like crazy and though he lost that point it killed Murray for the rest of the TB...and most of the 3rd set as he also broke Murray right at the beginning of the 3rd set.

Then of course while serving for the match at 5/4 Grigor could not find a 1st serve and started to be hesitant. Murray broke back but Dimi got angry at himself and almost broke Murray right back despite Murray being 40/0 up in his own serve (Dimi wasted 2 BPs).

But that was when Murray footwork completely collapsed. He blamed his shoes but whatever it was he certainly could not move and Grigor won a relatively easy 3rd set TB.

A very good week for SHBH so far....therefore a good week for tennis.