The real Tennis thread.

Page 32 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Let's face it, Halep should be at least happy she made it this far. She injured her ankle on day one, she probably wondered if she would even continue with the tournament, escaped three match points against Davis, escaped two against Kerber and she was fighting again today against Wozniacki. A tough road compounded with an injury. It sucks that she lost another GS final, but I she'll have other chances, yes, chances, plural.

She could become like Murray or Lendl and win multiple slams after losing the first 3 or 4. Lendl lost 4 finals before finally winning, Murray lost 5 before winning the 2012 US Open. She deserves one now more than ever.
 
BullsFan22 said:
Let's face it, Halep should be at least happy she made it this far. She injured her ankle on day one, she probably wondered if she would even continue with the tournament, escaped three match points against Davis, escaped two against Kerber and she was fighting again today against Wozniacki. A tough road compounded with an injury. It sucks that she lost another GS final, but I she'll have other chances, yes, chances, plural.

She could become like Murray or Lendl and win multiple slams after losing the first 3 or 4. Lendl lost 4 finals before finally winning, Murray lost 5 before winning the 2012 US Open. She deserves one now more than ever.
Murray lost 4 finals before winning the USO, and was won the Olympics like 4 weeks after losing his first Wimbly final. Murray never really choked in Slam finals before that though, he just got outplayed or sucked. Halep could've won 3 Slams by now if she was more clutch, but I don't really blame her much for this final. She was physically done and fought to the end.
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
KING ROGER!!! he could win this final in 3 sets...
Impossible to say. Cilic played very well in the 2nd set, which could have gone both ways. In the 4th set, I agree, Federer basically gave Cilic the chance to come back and win it. It was a very weak set by Federer.

Overall, I think it was a good match, also for Cilic who managed to wash away the bad impressions from last year's Wimbledon final. Periodically, Cilic was the better player, and in that way I think he really succeeded in showing his potential against the greatest player of all time.
 
Red Rick said:
BullsFan22 said:
Watched the highlights of the Halep Kerber match. It was pretty good, but again, it's just 'highlights.' Both ran a lot of balls down, especially Kerber...both had power, winners...Halep will really need to improve her serve against Wozniacki, but she's capable of breaking anyone, so there will be a number of breaks in the final, no doubt about that, unless someone is serving above expectations. One thing that surprised me was that for a three setter, and a 9-7 scoreline in the 3rd, it wasn't that long, 2:20. That's good for Halep, because if this was another 4 hour match, it wouldn't have done much good. This is now the 2nd match of the tournament where she's saved multiple match points. This 'should' help her before the final, knowing she can hold her nerve. That said, she is in a similar position as in 2017 Roland Garros. Escaped against Svitolina, then was in command against Ostapenko in the Final and ended up choking.
Just watched those highlights too. Very impressive hitting from Halep, didn't knew she had that kind of hitting in her. I figured Kerber would just outgrind her.

In any case, you could see at times that both players were slowing down a bit in the third set, and started being more selective in chasing balls in longer rallies. Some people claim the women can play 5 sets, but with their lack of serve and short points, it's just not possible
Fascinating observation.

I am more of a fan of women's tennis, and have always felt that they should play best of 5 in GS's, but that they haven't due to: A) individuals not speaking up and suggesting strongly that they should play 5, B) time restrictions in the scheduling.

No GS could fit in all the early round matches if both men and women's singles were best of 5.

So my suggestion is that women play best of 5 from the quarter-final stage onwards.

I had never taken into account the extra effort that most of the top women players (Serena, plus maybe Pliskova on a good day aside) have to put in to win points, games, sets. Most men will have at least one service game a set where they serve 80% or more non-returnables; they're hardly spending much energy, whilst women winning points just off their serve is often at a premium. In addition to that, because of the reduced advantage on the serve for women, they have far more deuce games.

Having said all of that, I feel like women could still play best of 5. It's just a willingness of fans to accept a drop in overall standard, plus more tactical 'tanking'. Best of 5 would also benefit someone like Wozniacki more, and I like the idea of endurance playing an even greater part in the game.

Also on this subject; is it almost ridiculous that men play best of 5, for 7 matches, at Rolland Garros? Their serve doesn't have the same impact on clay.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
Roger has been more dominant than ever in this season. he surpassed that strange mental block against nadal and now he doesn't have any challenger so he can win more than 10 titles this season. Tennis needs nadal and djoko so much... federer lost 4 sets in 2018...
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
Roger has been more dominant than ever in this season. he surpassed that strange mental block against nadal and now he doesn't have any challenger so he can win more than 10 titles this season. Tennis needs nadal and djoko so much... federer lost 4 sets in 2018...
It's just ridiculous how bad the competition is right now. Seeing how a Federer who was already labeled "past his prime" years ago can win by sheer will right now really makes me wonder if this Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray era was a once in a lifetime generation.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
2
0
Re: Re:

Gigs_98 said:
portugal11 said:
Roger has been more dominant than ever in this season. he surpassed that strange mental block against nadal and now he doesn't have any challenger so he can win more than 10 titles this season. Tennis needs nadal and djoko so much... federer lost 4 sets in 2018...
It's just ridiculous how bad the competition is right now. Seeing how a Federer who was already labeled "past his prime" years ago can win by sheer will right now really makes me wonder if this Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray era was a once in a lifetime generation.
of course it was... Federer, Nadal and Djoko are the 3 best tennis players of all times
 
Re: Re:

Gigs_98 said:
portugal11 said:
Roger has been more dominant than ever in this season. he surpassed that strange mental block against nadal and now he doesn't have any challenger so he can win more than 10 titles this season. Tennis needs nadal and djoko so much... federer lost 4 sets in 2018...
It's just ridiculous how bad the competition is right now. Seeing how a Federer who was already labeled "past his prime" years ago can win by sheer will right now really makes me wonder if this Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray era was a once in a lifetime generation.
There's many partial answers to that question.

Talent influx is way down in tennis, that's for sure. It's been down for a long time, but you don't immediately see that because it only affects the Tour some 15 years after or so.

Poly strings have changed the game. They've led to the modern forehand, the death of serve & volley, and now that all the upcoming youngsters have grown up with poly, maybe the end of all court players too. A lot of the skills and talents are developed very early, and if you have to grind on the baseline to get results in juniors you're limiting your skill cap in other departments for later on.

The level of the Big 4 will not be reached by any of the current youngsters on Tour. Their games all have major limitations. The overall level of the ATP tour is going down, and we don't know when it will kick back up again.

In terms of dominance, it likely is a once in a lifetime thing. But it's very easy to forget how weak the generation between Sampras/Agassi and Federer/Safin/Roddick was. And right now, the youngest player on Tour that holds a Slam title is 29. That's unprecedented too. So you have 4 really talented players and in the 8 years before and after them there's a whole big bag of nothing.
 
Re:

Red Rick said:
Meanwhile, Federer goes on a 2 match losing streak and loses his #1 ranking by losing to Thanasi Kokkinakis in the 2nd round of Miami
The beginning of a bigger slide ? Del Potro could win a few tournaments if he can stay healthy and there is so much uncertainty about the big four re injuries etc.
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
Red Rick said:
Meanwhile, Federer goes on a 2 match losing streak and loses his #1 ranking by losing to Thanasi Kokkinakis in the 2nd round of Miami
The beginning of a bigger slide ? Del Potro could win a few tournaments if he can stay healthy and there is so much uncertainty about the big four re injuries etc.
Federer is 36. Obviously the long term trend for him is downwards. His top level doesn't decline as quickly, but it's getting more infrequent, and crap matches are getting crappier. He wins most matches vs average opponents playing average, breaking a time or 2 and cruising on serve. Because of this, and his huge knack for *** up close matches, he's prone to bad but close losses. Federer really lets a lot of matches get closer than they should be based on his dominance ratio, and when points go 50/50 he loses pretty often.

Anyway, he's announced he'll skip the clay season, will be back by Halle, unless he later decides to enter Stuttgart too. This is a bad loss for him, but Miami has always been his worst tournament on HC.

2017 was a ridiculous outlier for Federer, and basically every single thing that could go right went right, apart from having back issues in the US HC summer.

There's one thing in Federer's favour still.

The Tour is in more shambles than ever. Del Potro is the only one with some consistency on HC but he's no fitness animal and can't play that much either. He's considering skipping clay as well.
 
The streak is at an end.

Dominic Thiem beats Nadal 75 63 in the Madrid QF, after Nadal had won 50(!!) consecutive sets on clay. Nadal hasn't lost to any other player than Thiem on clay since 2016, when Nadal lost to Djokovic in Rome. He may be wildly inconsistent, but Thiem is definitely the best clay court player after Nadal. I just hope they he is drawn on the opposite side of Nadal at Rome and RG.

And as Nadal was defending his win from last year, Federer goes back to #1, and will remain there until the 2nd week of grass season unless Nadal wins Rome next week.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts