Tennis

Page 141 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

iejeecee said:
Bwlch y Groes said:
Gilles Muller beats Nadal in the longest match of Wimbledon and barely looks tired. Huge upturn in form - never gone past the 3rd round at Wimbledon before this year and now looks like one of the best grass court players in the world. May break into the top 20 after this tournament at this rate, for the first time in his career - at 34!
Nadal has been dumped out in the early rounds of wimbledon for at least the past 5 years. Seems like they load him up with everything they have for Roland Garros and after that there isn't enough time for a second cycle or his body doesn't respond the same way as when he was younger.
Or he's a better player on clay than on grass.
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
iejeecee said:
Bwlch y Groes said:
Gilles Muller beats Nadal in the longest match of Wimbledon and barely looks tired. Huge upturn in form - never gone past the 3rd round at Wimbledon before this year and now looks like one of the best grass court players in the world. May break into the top 20 after this tournament at this rate, for the first time in his career - at 34!
Nadal has been dumped out in the early rounds of wimbledon for at least the past 5 years. Seems like they load him up with everything they have for Roland Garros and after that there isn't enough time for a second cycle or his body doesn't respond the same way as when he was younger.
Or he's a better player on clay than on grass.
He was still very good on grass but then started losing in early rounds to unseeded players. This year was actually one of his better performances.
 
Re: Re:

DanielSong39 said:
tobydawq said:
iejeecee said:
Bwlch y Groes said:
Gilles Muller beats Nadal in the longest match of Wimbledon and barely looks tired. Huge upturn in form - never gone past the 3rd round at Wimbledon before this year and now looks like one of the best grass court players in the world. May break into the top 20 after this tournament at this rate, for the first time in his career - at 34!
Nadal has been dumped out in the early rounds of wimbledon for at least the past 5 years. Seems like they load him up with everything they have for Roland Garros and after that there isn't enough time for a second cycle or his body doesn't respond the same way as when he was younger.
Or he's a better player on clay than on grass.
He was still very good on grass but then started losing in early rounds to unseeded players. This year was actually one of his better performances.
That hardly conflicts with my statement. Tennis matches on grass are much more liable to upsets than matches on clay and puts a lot less strain on the body with their much shorter rallies.
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
iejeecee said:
Bwlch y Groes said:
Gilles Muller beats Nadal in the longest match of Wimbledon and barely looks tired. Huge upturn in form - never gone past the 3rd round at Wimbledon before this year and now looks like one of the best grass court players in the world. May break into the top 20 after this tournament at this rate, for the first time in his career - at 34!
Nadal has been dumped out in the early rounds of wimbledon for at least the past 5 years. Seems like they load him up with everything they have for Roland Garros and after that there isn't enough time for a second cycle or his body doesn't respond the same way as when he was younger.
Or he's a better player on clay than on grass.
Of course he is, but remember his monster-arms times. Nobody had a chance in Wimbledon apart from Federer.
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
DanielSong39 said:
tobydawq said:
iejeecee said:
Bwlch y Groes said:
Gilles Muller beats Nadal in the longest match of Wimbledon and barely looks tired. Huge upturn in form - never gone past the 3rd round at Wimbledon before this year and now looks like one of the best grass court players in the world. May break into the top 20 after this tournament at this rate, for the first time in his career - at 34!
Nadal has been dumped out in the early rounds of wimbledon for at least the past 5 years. Seems like they load him up with everything they have for Roland Garros and after that there isn't enough time for a second cycle or his body doesn't respond the same way as when he was younger.
Or he's a better player on clay than on grass.
He was still very good on grass but then started losing in early rounds to unseeded players. This year was actually one of his better performances.
That hardly conflicts with my statement. Tennis matches on grass are much more liable to upsets than matches on clay and puts a lot less strain on the body with their much shorter rallies.

Are they?

To play devils advocate there have been 16 different RG champions since 1990 ( I use it as a cuttoff point for non wooden racket error, though even if we go earlier there were several different champions in the 1980's)

In Wimbledon during the same period there were 11 different champions.
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
Are they?

To play devils advocate there have been 16 different RG champions since 1990 ( I use it as a cuttoff point for non wooden racket error, though even if we go earlier there were several different champions in the 1980's)

In Wimbledon during the same period there were 11 different champions.
I would assume so. But I have no data to back the statement up other than the use of my eyes.

I just find it a bit annoying that every performance in a sport as technically demanding as tennis apparently is indicative of either the use or non-use of doping. But I guess that is just typical for this forum.
 
Aug 15, 2016
86
0
0
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
The Hitch said:
Are they?

To play devils advocate there have been 16 different RG champions since 1990 ( I use it as a cuttoff point for non wooden racket error, though even if we go earlier there were several different champions in the 1980's)

In Wimbledon during the same period there were 11 different champions.
I would assume so. But I have no data to back the statement up other than the use of my eyes.

I just find it a bit annoying that every performance in a sport as technically demanding as tennis apparently is indicative of either the use or non-use of doping. But I guess that is just typical for this forum.
To a certain extent, but with Muller it's more than one performance - it's a whole year of suddenly becoming one of the best in the world on grass. At 34. Before this year, the last time he had gone past the second round at Wimbledon was 6 years ago. It's 9 years since his previous quarter-final appearance in a grand slam, and that was on a hard court. Now he's in a final set for a place in the semis, with a good chance of making the final if he wins it. At 34

(He is about to lose, though)
 
Muller takes Cilic to 5 sets in another gruelling match, one Cilic was expected to 7-5/7-5/7-5 his way to the SF. Ridiculous performances. I see old man Federer is already after breaking the Serve Bot as well.

At least Andy Murray ran out of juice for his dodgy hip. Small victories.
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
The Hitch said:
Are they?

To play devils advocate there have been 16 different RG champions since 1990 ( I use it as a cuttoff point for non wooden racket error, though even if we go earlier there were several different champions in the 1980's)

In Wimbledon during the same period there were 11 different champions.
I would assume so. But I have no data to back the statement up other than the use of my eyes.

I just find it a bit annoying that every performance in a sport as technically demanding as tennis apparently is indicative of either the use or non-use of doping. But I guess that is just typical for this forum.
No, I think the consensus is everyone is doping; the question is whether the dope is state-of-the-art or belongs in the stone ages.

The most common theme is that extended careers and unexpected renaissance after 10+ years on tour could be indicative of new dope.
 
Federer straight sets Raonic. Never ever looked troubled. With Murray and Novak gone it's all but a formality now. Someone said that it's more likely than not that Federer holds 3 grand slams by the end of the year and you'd have to agree. God knows what sh*t he's been putting in himself to get back to his peak years. Of course Tennis fans are the dumbest sports fans in existence and don't suspect a thing.
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
Re:

Pantani Attacks said:
Federer straight sets Raonic. Never ever looked troubled. With Murray and Novak gone it's all but a formality now. Someone said that it's more likely than not that Federer holds 3 grand slams by the end of the year and you'd have to agree. God knows what sh*t he's been putting in himself to get back to his peak years. Of course Tennis fans are the dumbest sports fans in existence and don't suspect a thing.
What's also dumb is attributing any observed variation in performance to variation in doping.
 
Re: Re:

SeriousSam said:
Pantani Attacks said:
Federer straight sets Raonic. Never ever looked troubled. With Murray and Novak gone it's all but a formality now. Someone said that it's more likely than not that Federer holds 3 grand slams by the end of the year and you'd have to agree. God knows what sh*t he's been putting in himself to get back to his peak years. Of course Tennis fans are the dumbest sports fans in existence and don't suspect a thing.
What's also dumb is attributing any observed variation in performance to variation in doping.
That variation being colossal. Had Roger been still up there with Murray and Novak recently I'd be less sceptical. Granted he has had some injuries and has been beaten by Novak, a guy clearly doped to the gills in recent years, his performances this year have been nothing short of immaculate and not too far away from his past prime. I fail to believe it's just good fortune and some better coaching and fitness management that's doing this...Federer was always the epitome of professional. The fact is the man goes from not winning a slam since '12 to winning one in one of his greatest individual performances ever, all but winning another Wimbledon and the red hot favourite for the US Open already...all at 35.

Something definitely has changed, and it's something drastic.
 
It's been mentioned more than a few times by commentators that periods of ultra-dominance often lasts ~1-2 years. Federer is the exception but it's definitely true for Nadal and Djokovic. It seems to happen a lot in golf as well.

After the period of ultra-dominance you often see the bodies break down and you see injury after injury.

Maybe I'm seeing too much into this but maybe I'm not. In any case even the mainstream sports media seems to have picked up on this.
 
Re:

tobydawq said:
But the two "new" guys who have been winning slams after Roger and Rafa have played badly this year. That could also be relevant.
Federer and Nadal still have to get through the other guys and they're playing like it's 2007. It wasn't that long ago when they were losing early and often against decent competition.
 
Re: Re:

Pantani Attacks said:
SeriousSam said:
Pantani Attacks said:
Federer straight sets Raonic. Never ever looked troubled. With Murray and Novak gone it's all but a formality now. Someone said that it's more likely than not that Federer holds 3 grand slams by the end of the year and you'd have to agree. God knows what sh*t he's been putting in himself to get back to his peak years. Of course Tennis fans are the dumbest sports fans in existence and don't suspect a thing.
What's also dumb is attributing any observed variation in performance to variation in doping.
That variation being colossal. Had Roger been still up there with Murray and Novak recently I'd be less sceptical. Granted he has had some injuries and has been beaten by Novak, a guy clearly doped to the gills in recent years, his performances this year have been nothing short of immaculate and not too far away from his past prime. I fail to believe it's just good fortune and some better coaching and fitness management that's doing this...Federer was always the epitome of professional. The fact is the man goes from not winning a slam since '12 to winning one in one of his greatest individual performances ever, all but winning another Wimbledon and the red hot favourite for the US Open already...all at 35.

Something definitely has changed, and it's something drastic.
He's hasn't won since 2012 but he was never far off - apart from 2013 he made it into at least two semi finals a year. Overall, he had 5 semis and 3 finals in 14 GS. Everything is in its right place this year, with Djokovic struggling, Murray struggling, Nadal brilliant but still dodgy on grass and a complete dearth of any new talent (apart from thiem on clay). It's his performances which are more suspicious rather than his results. However, I don't think he is moving that much better than in the past and we haven't seen him go to anymore than three sets yet so we haven't seen fatigue hit him at all.
 
Federer is not "re surging". Great champion, he'd in his Contador '14 or '15 stage. Can he pull one more? He's surpassed, but he's crafty and respected. Players are star-struck when playing him. They don't play at their level. He's declining, not re surging.
 
Tonton said:
Federer is not "re surging". Great champion, he'd in his Contador '14 or '15 stage. Can he pull one more? He's surpassed, but he's crafty and respected. Players are star-struck when playing him. They don't play at their level. He's declining, not re surging.
I don't disagree with you about Federer being a great champion. He is one of my two all-time favorites, the other being Bjorn Borg -- both guys unsurpassed in panache, two of the greatest shot-makers ever, beautiful players of the game. It just seemed to me that in recent years, Roger's sharpness would fade in some of the high-stakes matches that made it to five sets -- an endurance issue. The fifth set was his Achilles heel (in recent years). But not so in 2017. He was an iron man in the Australian Open.
 
Re:

DanielSong39 said:
It's been mentioned more than a few times by commentators that periods of ultra-dominance often lasts ~1-2 years. Federer is the exception but it's definitely true for Nadal and Djokovic. It seems to happen a lot in golf as well.

After the period of ultra-dominance you often see the bodies break down and you see injury after injury.

Maybe I'm seeing too much into this but maybe I'm not. In any case even the mainstream sports media seems to have picked up on this.
True for Nadal and djokovic?
Don't agree with that at all. These guys played every final against each other for a year in 2011-12. Think about how djoker did the gs in 2016, and Nadal had been year end number 1 in 08, 10 and 13. Djokovic in 11,12 14 and 15. Almost 16 as well
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY