The real Tennis thread.

Page 27 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
Who is FAA? Cilic was so bas yesterday, i thought he would be the first finalist of the us open. Federer is playing very badly, he won't win this us open, that's sure
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
Who is FAA? Cilic was so bas yesterday, i thought he would be the first finalist of the us open. Federer is playing very badly, he won't win this us open, that's sure
Cilic was pathetic yesterday. Same thing happened in the same round against Sock last year. It's too bad. I think he'll rue this opportunity. Then again, it's been that kind of summer on the ATP and WTA.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
Re: Re:

the delgados said:
portugal11 said:
Who is FAA? Cilic was so bas yesterday, i thought he would be the first finalist of the us open. Federer is playing very badly, he won't win this us open, that's sure
Felix Auger-Alliasime.
He's another up and comer who some say is better than El Shapo.
What did he win to get this hype? (I don't know anything about him and I'm a regular fan of tennis)
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
portugal11 said:
Who is FAA? Cilic was so bas yesterday, i thought he would be the first finalist of the us open. Federer is playing very badly, he won't win this us open, that's sure
Cilic was pathetic yesterday. Same thing happened in the same round against Sock last year. It's too bad. I think he'll rue this opportunity. Then again, it's been that kind of summer on the ATP and WTA.
After what I saw from cilic in wimbledon, I really thought he would be the second most likely winner and he was in the easiest side of the tournament. Zverev disappointed me too, he has a mental block in majors and I really don't know why
 
Re: Re:

portugal11 said:
the delgados said:
portugal11 said:
Who is FAA? Cilic was so bas yesterday, i thought he would be the first finalist of the us open. Federer is playing very badly, he won't win this us open, that's sure
Felix Auger-Alliasime.
He's another up and comer who some say is better than El Shapo.
What did he win to get this hype? (I don't know anything about him and I'm a regular fan of tennis)
No clue. I'm too lazy to google the guy. All I know is he's still a junior.
I'm only telling you what I've read about him.

p.s. Seems the draw is wide open for El Shapo to make a serious run to the finals. That would be awesome.
Suddenly Milos has become an afterthought here in Canada. I still think he has it in him to win a major, but man oh man, how times change so quickly.
 
Re: Re:

the delgados said:
portugal11 said:
the delgados said:
portugal11 said:
Who is FAA? Cilic was so bas yesterday, i thought he would be the first finalist of the us open. Federer is playing very badly, he won't win this us open, that's sure
Felix Auger-Alliasime.
He's another up and comer who some say is better than El Shapo.
What did he win to get this hype? (I don't know anything about him and I'm a regular fan of tennis)
No clue. I'm too lazy to google the guy. All I know is he's still a junior.
I'm only telling you what I've read about him.

p.s. Seems the draw is wide open for El Shapo to make a serious run to the finals. That would be awesome.
Suddenly Milos has become an afterthought here in Canada. I still think he has it in him to win a major, but man oh man, how times change so quickly.
The tennis forums are hyped since he reached a QF of a challenger at 14(!) and played a top 150 player pretty hard at that age too. He's in the top 200 now, only just 17.

Meanwhile, Fognini got kicked out of the USO (he was still in doubles) for sexist remarks toward the umpire. The fine is more than 3 times as big as the one Shapovalov got for hospitalizing an umpire.

There you have it vogues, better hospitalize an umpire than call them names. Or maybe it's because the latter was a women. Which in itself would be sexist but then you can never stop arguing.
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
2
0
When I checked the odds before any matches, Fed was the favourite followed by Nadal. Now Nadal is the favourite followed by Fed. Does that make sense to those of you who have watched the matches?

Ok, Fed had these 5 setters and it seems a bit brittle, but then Nadal struggled against absolute nobodies too and I feel like The Dolg may well beat him
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
The Hitch said:
OMG this Schwarzman guy is 170 cm. And he's in a Grand slam quarter final.

Pound for Pound GOAT
It's talent my friend. Roger is the second player with more aces in the history of tennis and he is "only" 185 cm. I think he can beat carreno busta who isn't a good server at all. He has a chance!
SeriousSam, nadal is the favourite now because federer gave (in the first two rounds) signals of a back injury. He looked heavy on the court
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
Re:

The Hitch said:
185 is way above average height, even for a young male. At that height it's perfectly believable that someone could hit aces and be an all around superstar.

170 is very very difficult.
Average height for a tennis player? I don't beleive it.
How could i miss rublev, this kid is fire. Today, he destroyed goffin who is normally very reliable
 
Haha Hitchie loves his tennis player sizes.

If somebdoy would ask me who to watch to leaern to play tennis, I'd tell them to watch Diego Schwartzman. No crazy unique talents and yet still so *** good. His racket head skills and point construction are amazing

Meanwhile, Rublev, 19, (1.88 for Hitch) reaches his first Slam QF. Has now reached more Slam QFs than Alex Zverev. That kid is amazing
 
SeriousSam said:
Hitch is right about it being extremely unusual for someone that diminutive to be good. https://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2017/09/go-shorty?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/ covers some of the stats
They mostly talk about serves though.

Being small is also more difficult because the net is basically higher for you.

Also, in the current topspin game, the ball bounces so high, smaller players have to hit the ball from a much higher position relative to the body, an uncomfortable technique outside the hitting zone. Well either that or stand way back and hit the ball when there is less pace on it and be more succeptible to drop shots.
I think this was one of the reasons why Del Potro was so good at his peak (and Soderling was great that year too). He was smashing every shot cos at that height you can hit the ball at such a comfortable position even within the baseline.

In tennis for smaller players, there are no advantages. In team sports smaller people can be great because there is the low centre of gravity to beat opponents eg Maradona or in NFL Barry Sanders. In stamina sports they can also excel (kenenisa Bekele, Pantani).

But in tennis everything favours being tall.

The article says that behemoths don't do well (6 foot 4 +) but 6 foot 4 (or 193 cm) is the 99th percentile even for males.

Half the worlds male population is around Schwarzman's height. Even if you look only at Europe and US where most tennis players come from, 50% of young males are smaller than 177cm, so even the "small" tennis players like Aggasi or Ferrer are actually above average height. If there were 300 million males in their 20's who were over 194 cm, I bet you some of those would be tennis champions.

Much respect to Diego. If Tennis was organized by size like boxing is, he would be Mayweather.
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
2
0
Being tall is pretty much a universal advantage for males. In business and love too.

Quarter-finalists:

Anderson: 2.03 m
Querrey: 1.99 m
Del Potro: 1.98 m
Rublev: 1.88 m
Busta: 1.88 m
Federer: 1.85 m
Nadal: 1.85 m
Schwartzman: 1.7 m

I do feel like there's something about being >1.9m that produces a disadvantage, when the worse ability to change direction, accelerate and reach low balls starts to outweigh the reach advantage. The very tall players just cannot move like the 1.9m Djokovic and Murray.
 
The Hitch said:
SeriousSam said:
Hitch is right about it being extremely unusual for someone that diminutive to be good. https://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2017/09/go-shorty?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/ covers some of the stats
They mostly talk about serves though.

Being small is also more difficult because the net is basically higher for you.

Also, in the current topspin game, the ball bounces so high, smaller players have to hit the ball from a much higher position relative to the body, an uncomfortable technique outside the hitting zone. Well either that or stand way back and hit the ball when there is less pace on it and be more succeptible to drop shots.
I think this was one of the reasons why Del Potro was so good at his peak (and Soderling was great that year too). He was smashing every shot cos at that height you can hit the ball at such a comfortable position even within the baseline.

In tennis for smaller players, there are no advantages. In team sports smaller people can be great because there is the low centre of gravity to beat opponents eg Maradona or in NFL Barry Sanders. In stamina sports they can also excel (kenenisa Bekele, Pantani).

But in tennis everything favours being tall.

The article says that behemoths don't do well (6 foot 4 +) but 6 foot 4 (or 193 cm) is the 99th percentile even for males.

Half the worlds male population is around Schwarzman's height. Even if you look only at Europe and US where most tennis players come from, 50% of young males are smaller than 177cm, so even the "small" tennis players like Aggasi or Ferrer are actually above average height. If there were 300 million males in their 20's who were over 194 cm, I bet you some of those would be tennis champions.

Much respect to Diego. If Tennis was organized by size like boxing is, he would be Mayweather.
Bounce height isn't all that big of a benefit, except on the backhand. Reach is a way bigger problem, but he does have the advantage of being super quick on the first 2 meters. He can return super aggro on 2nd serve return because it's so hard to hit in his body. He also shows that being underpowered from the baseline doesn't happen all that often if you're quicke enough and a very clean ball striker. Especially on fast courts
 
SeriousSam said:
Being tall is pretty much a universal advantage for males. In business and love too.

Quarter-finalists:

Anderson: 2.03 m
Querrey: 1.99 m
Del Potro: 1.98 m
Rublev: 1.88 m
Busta: 1.88 m
Federer: 1.85 m
Nadal: 1.85 m
Schwartzman: 1.7 m

I do feel like there's something about being >1.9m that produces a disadvantage, when the worse ability to change direction, accelerate and reach low balls starts to outweigh the reach advantage. The very tall players just cannot move like the 1.9m Djokovic and Murray.
Outside tennis I don't think height is that big a deal, unless you have small man insecurities or something. Personality is more important. But in sport, in events where height is important (like a net or a basket) it is crucial.
 
The Hitch said:
SeriousSam said:
Being tall is pretty much a universal advantage for males. In business and love too.

Quarter-finalists:

Anderson: 2.03 m
Querrey: 1.99 m
Del Potro: 1.98 m
Rublev: 1.88 m
Busta: 1.88 m
Federer: 1.85 m
Nadal: 1.85 m
Schwartzman: 1.7 m

I do feel like there's something about being >1.9m that produces a disadvantage, when the worse ability to change direction, accelerate and reach low balls starts to outweigh the reach advantage. The very tall players just cannot move like the 1.9m Djokovic and Murray.
Outside tennis I don't think height is that big a deal, unless you have small man insecurities or something. Personality is more important. But in sport, in events where height is important (like a net or a basket) it is crucial.
Leg space in airplanes man. Hitting your head everywhere. It's no fun at times
 
The Hitch said:
SeriousSam said:
Being tall is pretty much a universal advantage for males. In business and love too.

Quarter-finalists:

Anderson: 2.03 m
Querrey: 1.99 m
Del Potro: 1.98 m
Rublev: 1.88 m
Busta: 1.88 m
Federer: 1.85 m
Nadal: 1.85 m
Schwartzman: 1.7 m

I do feel like there's something about being >1.9m that produces a disadvantage, when the worse ability to change direction, accelerate and reach low balls starts to outweigh the reach advantage. The very tall players just cannot move like the 1.9m Djokovic and Murray.
Outside tennis I don't think height is that big a deal, unless you have small man insecurities or something. Personality is more important. But in sport, in events where height is important (like a net or a basket) it is crucial.
You get the occasional 5'9" basketball player (Isaiah Thomas) who's incredible but they are rare. There are other sports where it is pretty important too: rowing, some football positions, cricket (fast bowling), some rugby (ok most rugby) and high jump as well. But as a small man I don't think it's really a big deal in life. Or at least you don't notice it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY