Tennis

[The Hitch]

Re:

Hitch,
the reason the game at Wimbly is no longer similar to Goran vs. Rafter is due to a few issues (we won't talk about peds)
First the grass is grown and cut now to be a much slower surface. More similar to hard court surfaces of the past. Why? Because people no longer enjoyed a serve fest from Edberg vs. Becker, rallies were to short and monotonous. Racquet technology and string technology have also changed the game dramatically as well. No one makes a steady diet of serve and volley anymore, as Fed said, it's too high risk in today's game. With today's racquets and strings, one can put the ball away from the baseline or without even venturing into mid court. When that wasn't possible, you had to move in closer to the net in order to obtain an angle that the opponent could not run down. Hell, today you can hit an excellent serve but the return from our enlarged racquets with their super sized sweet spots comes back at the server almost as fast as he ripped it. But let's say you make a beautiful penetrating first volley inside the T (of which almost no one does any more) and you have Murray, Nadal, or Djoker 12 feet behind the baseline on the dead run and they're fully extended and yet they can still with today's graphite and poly strings rip a passing shot that you can't get to and yet they impart so much spin to the ball with poly strings that the ball drops like off a cliff and lands well within the baseline.

To see how the game has changed, look at these two finals on you tube and see where the grass is worn to dirt after 2 weeks, in the old days it would be right up the middle of the court and length wise along the net, Look at the more recent final and you'll see the baseline and behind is totally worn out and yet near the net, the grass will look almost new. Startling difference says it all.

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

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

But I wasn't talking about 1980's and 1990's compared to 20-30 years later.

I was talking about 2001, compared to 2,3 years later, when Federer began his domination entirely from the back of the court. When was the grass cut, 2002?

 

[The Hitch]

The guy who beat Nadal - Brown, looks like Froome in his upper body compared to some of the pics we have had of Nadal.

 

[SeriousSam]

I do think the way the forehand is being played changed quite dramatically in just a few years, starting with Fed's reign. Much more top spin. That leads to longer rallies on any surface because the velocity as the ball leaves the racket head is reduced, giving the other person more time to react (relative to flat forehand), and the shot itself is much less error prone than a flat forehand. If you hit full power flat forehands, all it takes is a tiny error and it's net or long. The second factor is that the agiliy of the players improved dramatically in quite a short time, starting with Fed and Nadal. Rafter was slow as ***, today you got the likes of Djokovic reaching every ball. Finally, what ruins serve and volley is strong returning and passing shots. For whatever reason, today's top players seem to be exceedingly good at both. Nadal being an exception, although he used to be a top 2 returner in his prime. Agassi was a very good returner, unique in that aspect. Today, they all seem to be as good as Agassi, with Murray and especially Djokovic being much better.


Personally, I'm not unhappy Wimbledon isn't a serve and volley fest anymore, or even a serve only fest. Is there anything less interesting to watch than service winners, or serves that set up winners?

 

[Zebadeedee]

You'd have to consider Borg and Vilas as the fathers of heavy topspin, though it was used well before those two. Modern racquets, strings, athlete size etc have made the shot more extreme these days as more power and rotation can be applied. Federer hits all kinds of forehands, not just topspin e.g slice forehand (with backspin) used typically in defensive situations.

 

[Peter70]

Re:

Hitch,
the reason the game at Wimbly is no longer similar to Goran vs. Rafter is due to a few issues (we won't talk about peds)
First the grass is grown and cut now to be a much slower surface. More similar to hard court surfaces of the past. Why? Because people no longer enjoyed a serve fest from Edberg vs. Becker, rallies were to short and monotonous. Racquet technology and string technology have also changed the game dramatically as well. No one makes a steady diet of serve and volley anymore, as Fed said, it's too high risk in today's game. With today's racquets and strings, one can put the ball away from the baseline or without even venturing into mid court. When that wasn't possible, you had to move in closer to the net in order to obtain an angle that the opponent could not run down. Hell, today you can hit an excellent serve but the return from our enlarged racquets with their super sized sweet spots comes back at the server almost as fast as he ripped it. But let's say you make a beautiful penetrating first volley inside the T (of which almost no one does any more) and you have Murray, Nadal, or Djoker 12 feet behind the baseline on the dead run and they're fully extended and yet they can still with today's graphite and poly strings rip a passing shot that you can't get to and yet they impart so much spin to the ball with poly strings that the ball drops like off a cliff and lands well within the baseline.

To see how the game has changed, look at these two finals on you tube and see where the grass is worn to dirt after 2 weeks, in the old days it would be right up the middle of the court and length wise along the net, Look at the more recent final and you'll see the baseline and behind is totally worn out and yet near the net, the grass will look almost new. Startling difference says it all.

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

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

They changed the ball to make it slower too. Mechanical doping to change the game. But according to the deluded vermin on here it's all about the drugs. With everybody. Nobody who competes in sport at any level is clean.

Benotti, the hitch, blackcat, all the vermin without an original thought or opinion worth crapping on.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

You're mental.

You're more than mental. You're a sad racist.

You're a sad racist with a child abuse fixation.

Murray doesn't dope. Give us just one shred of evidence. Just one. Or just piss off and die!

Peter, you are taking it far far far too serious. the default setting on my posts should be facetious. I am nothing more than a harlequin.

just take a xanax and have a lie down. I cant hurt. Deep breaths.

 

[the delgados]

Peter70.
Go to youtube and click on "bodybreak cycling."
Have a laugh, then rake a rest.
All will be well.

 

[the delgados]

"take" a rest.
No need for the anger, Peter70.

 

[blackcat]

Peter, just p'raps you should not enter The Clinic. Think of it as some gestalt of Dark Web and Chatroulette!

I dont think an athlete who dopes is necessarily a bad character. I dont know them, so I cannot make a personal judgement. I think PEDs and doping is a value neutral matter. Bad people dont dope, good people dope, so said the poster 131313 who is a pro on a domestic team in America, and Tour of Gila in 2009 when Armstrong came back, on the Queen stage, Lance went backwards, and 131313 passed him up the climb on the queen stage, within 2 months, Lance came third in the Tour, beating Wiggins out of fourth and the podium spot. That would have been Garmin Sharp I think. not that it matters.

I am actually quite empathic to Wiggins and his life narrative. His old man was never a father and left the family when he was barely the baby out of his mothers womb. So he had to do it tough. But I can still laugh at the parts of Froome and Wiggins and this US Postal second iteration that is Sky. All the continental pros dope too, all the Frenchies do. Does not make them poor people. Like the Australians, South Africans, and New Zealanders. My metric is, if you are at the pointy end of the peloton in the selective races, you, prima facie, are charging on some enhancement pharmacy or technique.

Have a look at my last post, or second last post, in the Adam Hansen thread, that will be a better pov from where i am coming from.

but shur, you can think i am a cnut, but there is the possibility for a more enlightening appreciation

 

[robow7]

Re: Re:

Hitch,
2001, Rafter and Goran, the game changed after that. You can see it in the style of player who was to win, and if you watch a few seconds of each year's final after that, you will see how the grounds (court surface) was worn after 2 weeks slowly moving until you have what we do today.

 

[beowulf]

Re: Re:

Hitch,
the reason the game at Wimbly is no longer similar to Goran vs. Rafter is due to a few issues (we won't talk about peds)
First the grass is grown and cut now to be a much slower surface. More similar to hard court surfaces of the past. Why? Because people no longer enjoyed a serve fest from Edberg vs. Becker, rallies were to short and monotonous. Racquet technology and string technology have also changed the game dramatically as well. No one makes a steady diet of serve and volley anymore, as Fed said, it's too high risk in today's game. With today's racquets and strings, one can put the ball away from the baseline or without even venturing into mid court. When that wasn't possible, you had to move in closer to the net in order to obtain an angle that the opponent could not run down. Hell, today you can hit an excellent serve but the return from our enlarged racquets with their super sized sweet spots comes back at the server almost as fast as he ripped it. But let's say you make a beautiful penetrating first volley inside the T (of which almost no one does any more) and you have Murray, Nadal, or Djoker 12 feet behind the baseline on the dead run and they're fully extended and yet they can still with today's graphite and poly strings rip a passing shot that you can't get to and yet they impart so much spin to the ball with poly strings that the ball drops like off a cliff and lands well within the baseline.

To see how the game has changed, look at these two finals on you tube and see where the grass is worn to dirt after 2 weeks, in the old days it would be right up the middle of the court and length wise along the net, Look at the more recent final and you'll see the baseline and behind is totally worn out and yet near the net, the grass will look almost new. Startling difference says it all.

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

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

But I wasn't talking about 1980's and 1990's compared to 20-30 years later.

I was talking about 2001, compared to 2,3 years later, when Federer began his domination entirely from the back of the court. When was the grass cut, 2002?

They changed texture of the court in 2001. It was apparently done to give a more consistent and higher bounce late in the tournament for players.

I think it has played a role in the decline of serve and volley tennis, but I would say that the use of heavier tennis balls at Wimbledon and the incredible spin that players can now get on the ball has had more of an impact in my opinion.

 

[thrawn]

Re: Re:

Hitch,
the reason the game at Wimbly is no longer similar to Goran vs. Rafter is due to a few issues (we won't talk about peds)
First the grass is grown and cut now to be a much slower surface. More similar to hard court surfaces of the past. Why? Because people no longer enjoyed a serve fest from Edberg vs. Becker, rallies were to short and monotonous. Racquet technology and string technology have also changed the game dramatically as well. No one makes a steady diet of serve and volley anymore, as Fed said, it's too high risk in today's game. With today's racquets and strings, one can put the ball away from the baseline or without even venturing into mid court. When that wasn't possible, you had to move in closer to the net in order to obtain an angle that the opponent could not run down. Hell, today you can hit an excellent serve but the return from our enlarged racquets with their super sized sweet spots comes back at the server almost as fast as he ripped it. But let's say you make a beautiful penetrating first volley inside the T (of which almost no one does any more) and you have Murray, Nadal, or Djoker 12 feet behind the baseline on the dead run and they're fully extended and yet they can still with today's graphite and poly strings rip a passing shot that you can't get to and yet they impart so much spin to the ball with poly strings that the ball drops like off a cliff and lands well within the baseline.

To see how the game has changed, look at these two finals on you tube and see where the grass is worn to dirt after 2 weeks, in the old days it would be right up the middle of the court and length wise along the net, Look at the more recent final and you'll see the baseline and behind is totally worn out and yet near the net, the grass will look almost new. Startling difference says it all.

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

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

But I wasn't talking about 1980's and 1990's compared to 20-30 years later.

I was talking about 2001, compared to 2,3 years later, when Federer began his domination entirely from the back of the court. When was the grass cut, 2002?

They changed texture of the court in 2001. It was apparently done to give a more consistent and higher bounce late in the tournament for players.

I think it has played a role in the decline of serve and volley tennis, but I would say that the use of heavier tennis balls at Wimbledon and the incredible spin that players can now get on the ball has had more of an impact in my opinion.

It's a combination of things:

Grass Change
Ball change
String & racquet improvement
Improved doping regimes

 

[The Hitch]

Hope you are watching Sam. Your boy Djoker is in serious danger of falling out

 

[SeriousSam]

At least it was a tough five setter which is bound to make Djokovic tir.. nevermind.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

At least it was a tough five setter which is bound to make Djokovic tir.. nevermind.

Ha.

Bigger deal I think that it was spread out over a few days.

To be fair in 2013 Djokovic did seem to get really tired after his 5 setter with Del Potro.

Maybe they have better testing in clean old England

 

[SeriousSam]

Serena seems to be struggling

 

[the delgados]

Indeed. Looks like Serena needs a little pick-me-up. A shot in the arm, you might say.

 

[Archibald]

Re:

Indeed. Looks like Serena needs a little pick-me-up. A shot in the arm, you might say.

yep, the left one looks a tad small compared to the right...

 

[The Hitch]

Pospisil is dying out there on the long rallies compared to Murray.

 

[SeriousSam]

Murray through. Looks like Wimbledon might get a clean winner again, although if not the Swiss Doper, then surely the Serbian Charger will put an end to the hopes of a nation.

 

[the delgados]

Re:

Pospisil is dying out there on the long rallies compared to Murray.

For what it's worth, all but one of Pospisil's previous matches went the distance. And just the other day he played a doubles match right after winning a five-setter.
I wasn't able to watch the match, but it's not surprising that he was gassed. Especially given the fact the Canucks don't do the droogs.

 

[Zebadeedee]

Pospisil looks as 'made' to me as the others. Maybe they're copying Djokovic and purposely making out to look half spent.

 

[SeriousSam]

gasquet stan 9-9 in the 5th. rooting for stan because richard will just mentally fold against djokovic

 

[SeriousSam]

Gasquet wins. Might be the biggest win of his career. His reward is a humiliating beatdown at the hands of Djokovic in the semi.

I like Gasquet tho. Elegant play.

 

[sniper]

that guy has a great touch.
can hit a classic volley. unlike hardhitters like nadal, djoko and murray.
not to mention his backhand.
the french always have one or two players of that type in store.
remember cedric pioline, henri leconte?

anyway, surprising win indeed. in the fifth against stanozolol. wouldn't have guessed.