Tennis

Page 137 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

mike75 said:
yaco said:
Good to see the misinformation continues even in non-cycling threads - Venus Williams has done an astonishing job to reach the Australian Open Tennis and get back into the top 10 - Especially when you consider she was diagnosed with Sjogrens Diseasein 2011 which is a debilitating illness - I am surprised she can still play on tour.
Well I think that's kind of the point. She's been pretty bad for a while now, and then all of a sudden she's in a final again, even with her recent poor play and illnesses.
Venus has hardly played poorly in the last two years - Got her ranking down from around 40 to the top 10 - This tournament is on outlier because of her soft draw.
 
Re: Re:

heart_attack_man said:
yaco said:
Good to see the misinformation continues even in non-cycling threads - Venus Williams has done an astonishing job to reach the Australian Open Tennis and get back into the top 10 - Especially when you consider she was diagnosed with Sjogrens Diseasein 2011 which is a debilitating illness - I am surprised she can still play on tour.
You do realise what the treatment is for Sjogrens, right? TUE FTW!
It's possible Venus is using a TUE - It's a speciality among American athletes.
 
Feb 3, 2013
198
0
0
Dimitrov looks like a tennis player from the 50's while Nadal increasingly looks like some Frankenstein science project.

And unsurprisingly Frankenstein has made it to the finals after blasting cannon balls across the net for 5 hours.
 
Re:

iejeecee said:
Dimitrov looks like a tennis player from the 50's while Nadal increasingly looks like some Frankenstein science project.

And unsurprisingly Frankenstein has made it to the finals after blasting cannon balls across the net for 5 hours.
In tennis it takes 2 to tango though. If Nadal was blasting power balls and running around for 5 sets, Dmitrov had to do the same to take him to 5.
 
Feb 3, 2013
198
0
0
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
In tennis it takes 2 to tango though. If Nadal was blasting power balls and running around for 5 sets, Dmitrov had to do the same to take him to 5.
I'm not saying Dimitrov (or any elite player) is clean, the visual contrast with Nadal is striking though. Whatever Dimitrov is taking isn't making him look like a raging roided balding maniac.
 
Nadal playing for 5 hours without dropping level is nothing new. The rest that is described is also basically the same thing Nadal has been doing for years. Ironic thing is that Nadal may actually have beaten the fitter man.
 
Aug 17, 2016
53
0
0
Re: Re:

iejeecee said:
The Hitch said:
In tennis it takes 2 to tango though. If Nadal was blasting power balls and running around for 5 sets, Dmitrov had to do the same to take him to 5.
I'm not saying Dimitrov (or any elite player) is clean, the visual contrast with Nadal is striking though. Whatever Dimitrov is taking isn't making him look like a raging roided balding maniac.
LOL come on, Nadal's been losing his hair for a very long time, it's just shorter now so you see how bad it is. He's always had a stockier build than the rest of the men too, just look at Djokovic, he literally looks like, and moves like Stretch Armstrong. The only tennis player with an over-the-top freakish build is Serena...her face is actually starting to look like a man's.
 
May 13, 2009
407
0
9,280
And don't forget, though it's only doubles, the Bryan brothers at almost 39 have reached the finals as well. It seems the Aussie has become almost a Masters tournament of the past.
 
Re: Re:

TMP402 said:
yaco said:
Think some are missing the underlying theme in modern day tennis - It now suits older player - few under 21's make the top 100.
All right, please explain.
I already explained - Players are remaining at or near their top into their 30's - It's more of a power game thus players take longer to develop strength, hence few under 21's in the top 100 - Even the majority of the top 100 are 26+
 
At this point the game has gone past the point of plausible deniability - it's getting more and more absurd with each passing tournament.

Well, Nadal gets to apply the final nail in the coffin tomorrow. Not that Fedbot is any better...

We might as well have cyborgs play tennis at this point.
 
Just realised that Federer turned pro in 1998. How many athletes in any sport were pros in 1998 and still pros now. In cycling Rebellin (nowhere near that high a level though) and it is a smaller sport. Buffon and maybe one or two other goalkeepers (but this is hardly the same type of physical activity). Don't think there is a single NBA player now that Kobe retired, or NFL now that Peyton did and they were shadows of their former selves.

Fed was pro in 1998 and is now taking sets and possibly still winning the final of a grand slam.
 
Re:

The Hitch said:
Just realised that Federer turned pro in 1998. How many athletes in any sport were pros in 1998 and still pros now. In cycling Rebellin (nowhere near that high a level though) and it is a smaller sport. Buffon and maybe one or two other goalkeepers (but this is hardly the same type of physical activity). Don't think there is a single NBA player now that Kobe retired, or NFL now that Peyton did and they were shadows of their former selves.

Fed was pro in 1998 and is now taking sets and possibly still winning the final of a grand slam.
He's 35 and in decline, to be fair. Federer is probably doping but there's one factor that you have to take into account - he's a savant. He routinely does things on the court that should almost be impossible.

Nadal on the other hand...
 
Jan 29, 2017
8
0
0
Re: Re:

yaco said:
I already explained - Players are remaining at or near their top into their 30's - It's more of a power game thus players take longer to develop strength, hence few under 21's in the top 100 - Even the majority of the top 100 are 26+
Emphasis on power, unlike the era of Sampras and Agassi? Get real.

If you look at grand slam winners from 1980 to 2012, men tended to peak at age 28, women at 26. After age 31 that was usually it in terms of wins for both men and women, with one of the rare exceptions being Navratilova at 33. We now have 2 35 year olds win in one tournament, one of whom looks likely to continue dominating for at least another year. Leaps in winner ages like this only happen in sports that embrace PEDs.
 
Aug 20, 2016
141
3
3,835
Re:

The Hitch said:
Just realised that Federer turned pro in 1998. How many athletes in any sport were pros in 1998 and still pros now. In cycling Rebellin (nowhere near that high a level though) and it is a smaller sport. Buffon and maybe one or two other goalkeepers (but this is hardly the same type of physical activity). Don't think there is a single NBA player now that Kobe retired, or NFL now that Peyton did and they were shadows of their former selves.

Fed was pro in 1998 and is now taking sets and possibly still winning the final of a grand slam.
Chris Chelios - NHL - Pro from 1983 through 2010. Retired at 48.
 
Re:

The Hitch said:
Just realised that Federer turned pro in 1998. How many athletes in any sport were pros in 1998 and still pros now. In cycling Rebellin (nowhere near that high a level though) and it is a smaller sport. Buffon and maybe one or two other goalkeepers (but this is hardly the same type of physical activity). Don't think there is a single NBA player now that Kobe retired, or NFL now that Peyton did and they were shadows of their former selves.

Fed was pro in 1998 and is now taking sets and possibly still winning the final of a grand slam.
Federer is a shadow of his former self, too, mind. This is his first performance in years that he has seemed even close to his pre-2014 level. And a lot of this is because the people he is up against are all pretty terrible atm. Murray and Djokovic would have beaten them without too much trouble on a normal day. But this has been a really weird tournament.

Maldini retired at 40+, and he was legendary. Although, his speed seemed to decrease quickly as he aged. Fitness less so, but that's normal as you often see 30+ marathon runners, but rarely do you see old sprinters. He did rely on his amazing tactical ability, calmness, and vision ever more in his late 30's. And Totti is still going (not amazingly, but his decline has only really been going on since 2010) at 40. Zanetti and Costacurta too went into their 40's. There are a very select few, but it isn't something completely revolutionary. Agassi was at the top of his game (or near) from '88 to '05.
 
Re: Re:

tyson766 said:
yaco said:
I already explained - Players are remaining at or near their top into their 30's - It's more of a power game thus players take longer to develop strength, hence few under 21's in the top 100 - Even the majority of the top 100 are 26+
Emphasis on power, unlike the era of Sampras and Agassi? Get real.

If you look at grand slam winners from 1980 to 2012, men tended to peak at age 28, women at 26. After age 31 that was usually it in terms of wins for both men and women, with one of the rare exceptions being Navratilova at 33. We now have 2 35 year olds win in one tournament, one of whom looks likely to continue dominating for at least another year. Leaps in winner ages like this only happen in sports that embrace PEDs.
I am giving you facts about the age of tennis players when they become more competitive - Going by your flawed logic it must only be the older players who take peds, because the under 23's and even under 25's seem to be limited against the players who are 25+.
 
Obviously younger players also use PED's. With that said, there has been a lot of changes to the game and the players are looking more robotic than ever before.

You know you've crossed the rubicon when people are playing 4-5 hour, 5-set matches then show zero signs of fatigue two days later in another marathon match.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY