Tennis 2016

Kevin said:
Looks more to be a difference in mental strength.
Click to expand...

For sure. Aside from the first set there was not a lot between them IMO. Murray just made more mistakes in the bigger moments. Similar story to last year.
 
So he has 11 slams now? Needs 6 to equal federer. If he can maintain this level for two more years... Could do it with the nothing opponents currently on the tour. Then again, he is 28 already, very hard.
 
Murray needs to just start swinging when he faces Djokovic. He can't start passive against Djokovic and playing catch up. It's no good playing aggressive when you a set down. The same can be said for Federer.

Wawrinka in the French open is a great example. It was basically all or nothing for him.

I think the other grand slams will be more open. Djokovics main objective for the year will be the French and olympics. I can't see him winning all four and the olympics.
 
Cooksen said:
But realistically there is only 4 times a year where the mistakes and embarrassing moments are world wide.

If you feck up in the premier league for even the small clubs it goes world wide.
Click to expand...

I dont really buy it, do you think Charlie Adams or Stephen Naismith is under more pressure than Tsonga or Berdych?

Collisions are however a very big factor. Constant niggles, stretches and muscles strains throughout the year can affect their speed and agility noticeably. Overall though, the athletes of the two sport have a similar shelf life, about 10 years from turning professional to decline, with a 3-4 years peak.
 
ZDwyr said:
I'm not sure the pool was worse. Sure, there may not have been two or three top guys but the rest of the field was deeper. I don't think Novak has done anything really special the last few years anyway. An aging Federer, Nadal cooked, and Murray coming off back surgery and being inconsistent?
Click to expand...
How about in 2011?

A deeper field? I'm too young to remember a lot of the guys Federer was playing but looking at the lists, it looks pretty average, maybe even worse depth than there is now.
 
saivet said:
How about in 2011?

A deeper field? I'm too young to remember a lot of the guys Federer was playing but looking at the lists, it looks pretty average, maybe even worse depth than there is now.
Click to expand...

Yeah 2011 was insane tennis. If you are arguing that he was better than Federer or Rafa in that period then you have a strong case. I find it too hard to split it personally.

I guess it is all pretty subjective. Personally I am really negative about the current crop too so that skews my opinion.
 
Tennis players are under more pressure.

Footballers have guaranteed contracts even rubbish ones can earn £50k a week. If tennis players start playing badly their earnings start to suffer.
 
btw, tennis players run less than football players. Isner ran 6 miles in the longes match ever (11 hours). our Blind covers that in 90 minutes - on average.
 
I really hope Murray can win another few slams. I don't want to say he deserves it, but after being so close so many times it would be good reward.
 
Cooksen said:
But realistically there is only 4 times a year where the mistakes and embarrassing moments are world wide.

If you feck up in the premier league for even the small clubs it goes world wide.
Click to expand...
I didn't disagree with the media pressure being more for footballers, but a different, more personal pressure hangs over tennis: your income will be immediately affected if you are rubbish. Especially for young up and comers in tennis this is pressure. if you are an average footballer underperforming, you still have some assurances with a running contract.
 
Bole Top said:
btw, tennis players run less than football players. Isner ran 6 miles in the longes match ever (11 hours). our Blind covers that in 90 minutes - on average.
Click to expand...
isner is a bad example, the guy plays very short points because of his huge serve. But in general I believe your point is true, however, tennis players will play more matches throughout a week than footballers.
 
Here's hoping that Nadal can recover some form in time for Roland Garros as I doubt Stan can do it again.
 
Kevin said:
Thinking of tennis I am wondering why the likes of Martial and other young players can't play week in week out without risking burn out when young top players in tennis play gruelling schedules that never change much from 19 until they are 30. They don't go; oh I am a kid, better skip these tournaments and wait till I am older.

No intentional re arrangements of schedules because of age. Skeptical about the theory that there is a need to pamper young footballers to avoid supposed burn out.
Click to expand...
Football's a much more brutal sport. You get more "down time" as you're not always involved in the play, but in tennis you don't have people trying to kick the stuffing out of you either.
 
Bole Top said:
btw, tennis players run less than football players. Isner ran 6 miles in the longes match ever (11 hours). our Blind covers that in 90 minutes - on average.
Click to expand...

That was a serve bot of a game. Nadal Djokovic 2012 would be more interesting.
 
Great achievement by Djokovic.

He must be licking his lips at the thought of every next grandslam right now. The next two GS will hopefully provide something different, with Djokovic having never won the French, and Wimbledon usually being Federer's best shot, and Murray having his usual support.
 
Bojan11 said:
Murray needs to just start swinging when he faces Djokovic. He can't start passive against Djokovic and playing catch up. It's no good playing aggressive when you a set down. The same can be said for Federer.

Wawrinka in the French open is a great example. It was basically all or nothing for him.

I think the other grand slams will be more open. Djokovics main objective for the year will be the French and olympics. I can't see him winning all four and the olympics.
Click to expand...

I thought Murray started off very aggressively in the first set and just got taken apart.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Football's a much more brutal sport. You get more "down time" as you're not always involved in the play, but in tennis you don't have people trying to kick the stuffing out of you either.
Click to expand...
Yeah that looks to be the major difference and a big factor,l. still think the paranoia about burning young players out to be too overblown though.
amolbhatia50k said:
Great achievement by Djokovic.

He must be licking his lips at the thought of every next grandslam right now. The next two GS will hopefully provide something different, with Djokovic having never won the French, and Wimbledon usually being Federer's best shot, and Murray having his usual support.
Click to expand...

Wasn't he one match, the Roland Garros final, away from doing the calendar grand slam past season? He might just do it this season...

Not that impressed with his tennis but he is mentally stronger than anyone out there and there seem to be no viable opponents left on the tour to stop him at this point in time.
 
ZDwyr said:
I'm not sure the pool was worse. Sure, there may not have been two or three top guys but the rest of the field was deeper. I don't think Novak has done anything really special the last few years anyway. An aging Federer, Nadal cooked, and Murray coming off back surgery and being inconsistent?
Click to expand...
Djokovic did win a good no. of them when both Nadal and Federer were fit/not aged and Murray was also fit. Plus the next tier of players including Wawrinka, Ferrer(few years back) and some new ones are good. The overall pool is definitely better imo compared to era when Fed dominated and even for a decade before that when any random guy used to win slam in between.
Djokovic's one slam win is against Tsonga (that type of player, 2nd/3rd tier), rest all are vs Federer, Murray, Nadal. Compared that to Fed who has final wins against likes of Baghdatis, Phillippoussis, Fernando Gonzalez(!), Soderling etc. I am not even counting one win vs almost retired Agassi, couple against Roddick (who in current era will struggle to be in top 8), Hewitt (no better than Wawrinka).
 
Kevin said:
Yeah that looks to be the major difference and a big factor,l. still think the paranoia about burning young players out to be too overblown though.


Wasn't he one match, the Roland Garros final, away from doing the calendar grand slam past season? He might just do it this season...

Not that impressed with his tennis but he is mentally stronger than anyone out there and there seem to be no viable opponents left on the tour to stop him at this point in time.
Click to expand...
Correct.

We've got the Olympics too which while it's not a Grand Slam, it's the next big thing. Djokovic has never won it either, so could be an even greater year for him.
 
ZDwyr said:
I'm not sure the pool was worse. Sure, there may not have been two or three top guys but the rest of the field was deeper. I don't think Novak has done anything really special the last few years anyway. An aging Federer, Nadal cooked, and Murray coming off back surgery and being inconsistent?
Click to expand...

It was worse without a doubt imo. We are talking about a time where unseeded players made it to GS finals and not because they were so awesome (it happened only once for them) but because the Top10/20 players weren't that great and inconsistent. Guys like Verkerk, Puerta, Baghdatis or Philipoussis reached GS finals and then you never saw them again. Federer beat 2 of them plus Gonzales or grandpa Agassi to win GS titles. His biggest rival was Roddick, which serve was the only exceptional thing and who has less to his game then Murray or Stan. Before Federer's rise a 33-year-old Agassi won the AO title against fecking Rainer Schuettler. It was even worse on clay, where players like Federer, Roddick, Hewitt were pretty shit. That's why guys like Ferrero or Gaudio could pick up a RG title before Nadal arrived.
It was a pretty shit era, comparable and as unpredictale as current women tennis (except Federer and Serena in their frontrunner role)
 
The Man Himself said:
Djokovic did win a good no. of them when both Nadal and Federer were fit/not aged and Murray was also fit. Plus the next tier of players including Wawrinka, Ferrer(few years back) and some new ones are good. The overall pool is definitely better imo compared to era when Fed dominated and even for a decade before that when any random guy used to win slam in between.
Djokovic's one slam win is against Tsonga (that type of player, 2nd/3rd tier), rest all are vs Federer, Murray, Nadal. Compared that to Fed who has final wins against likes of Baghdatis, Phillippoussis, Fernando Gonzalez(!), Soderling etc. I am not even counting one win vs almost retired Agassi, couple against Roddick (who in current era will struggle to be in top 8), Hewitt (no better than Wawrinka).
Click to expand...

In 2011-early 2012 I agree. Although he got a little lucky in 2008 because Tsonga took out Nadal and Federer had glandular fever. His last five have been won with pretty weak competition though

I think you underrate some of Federer's opponents. I think Roddick would certainly be top 8 if playing now, and would still be a genuine threat at Wimbledon and possibly the odd USO or AO.
 
Pyroblazer said:
It was worse without a doubt imo. We are talking about a time where unseeded players made it to GS finals and not because they were so awesome (it happened only once for them) but because the Top10/20 players weren't that great and inconsistent. Guys like Verkerk, Puerta, Baghdatis or Philipoussis reached GS finals and then you never saw them again. Federer beat 2 of them plus Gonzales or grandpa Agassi to win GS titles. His biggest rival was Roddick, which serve was the only exceptional thing and who has less to his game then Murray or Stan. Before Federer's rise a 33-year-old Agassi won the AO title against fecking Rainer Schuettler. It was even worse on clay, where players like Federer, Roddick, Hewitt were pretty shit. That's why guys like Ferrero or Gaudio could pick up a RG title before Nadal arrived.
It was a pretty shit era, comparable and as unpredictale as current women tennis (except Federer and Serena in their frontrunner role)
Click to expand...

Possibly. As I said earlier though I seem to rate that crop of players higher than most. And it's not like Federer was having difficulty with them, he was beating most of them with relative ease. And IMO that was down to how good he was.
 
Roddick would make top 8 in current era easily.

I've said it before, but I wish Del Potro didn't get injured. He was at the perfect age to challenge Djokovic in the last few years.
 
Bole Top said:
Roddick is at Raonic level at best (which isn't that bad, I guess)
Click to expand...

Seriously? Roddick won a grand slam and made 4 Wimbledon finals, losing to arguably the greatest grass court player of all time. That is way more impressive than Raonic.
 
These things are hard to judge. Someone above said Federer's beat an almost retired Agassi. But Agassi was terrific on the night. Some of his ball striking was stunning and Federer really had to raise his game to win. That was definitely a better performance than most of what Murray has shown in the finals he has lost.
 
Bole Top said:
Roddick is at Raonic level at best (which isn't that bad, I guess)
Click to expand...

He isn't. He is better than Ferrer or Berdych.

One of few players or maybe the only player ever now to have a 5-4 winning record against Djokovic.
 
ZDwyr said:
Seriously? Roddick won a grand slam and made 4 Wimbledon finals, losing to arguably the greatest grass court player of all time. That is way more impressive than Raonic.
Click to expand...
Roddick was a very good player at his best. The issue is that the domination of the serve is slowly finishing, and only baseline rallying is valued.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Roddick was a very good player at his best. The issue is that the domination of the serve is slowly finishing, and only baseline rallying is valued.
Click to expand...

True, but Roddick's baseline game was not completely awful. I am sure that had he, like Raonic, been forced to work hard to improve that part of his game he could.
 
Bojan11 said:
Roddick would make top 8 in current era easily.

I've said it before, but I wish Del Potro didn't get injured. He was at the perfect age to challenge Djokovic in the last few years.
Click to expand...
Probably around 6th at best.

His GS record is not all that good on paper.
 
ZDwyr said:
I really hope Murray can win another few slams. I don't want to say he deserves it, but after being so close so many times it would be good reward.
Click to expand...

Aye, it'd be great. I feel like he can already be pleased with what he's achieved, since winning 2 GS's means he's not only gotten one, but shown it wasn't a fluke since he was able to do it again. Still, for how good he is and for how consistently he's been a top 4 player, it'd be nice to see him pick up a couple more.

Bojan11 said:
Roddick would make top 8 in current era easily.

I've said it before, but I wish Del Potro didn't get injured. He was at the perfect age to challenge Djokovic in the last few years.
Click to expand...

Aye, Del Potro was brilliant. Think it was 2013 where he gave Djokovic a terrific semi-final at Wimbledon. Felt like a teaser into what should have been.
 
saivet said:
Probably around 6th at best.

His GS record is not all that good on paper.
Click to expand...

That's because after his US open win he got a wrist injury which kept him out for a year. He then came back and was still having trouble with his wrists. He slowly started getting back to his best in 2013 and put a great performance vs Djokovic at Wimbledon. But the last few years again he has been troubled by wrist problems.

I'm not saying he'd beat Djokovic. But he would definitely at his peak have the game to trouble him. Also first guy to beat Nadal and Federer in a slam which shouldn't be underestimated. When at a time Murray and Djokovic were struggling to beat them in slams. If he didn't pick up the stupid wrist injury he'd definitely have more than one slam.

He has missed 12 slams since 2009 and played in 13. That's basically 3 years the injury has robbed him.
 
Think I've said before on here that 2003-5 Roddick would win Wimbledon against this field. And people shouldn't just look at the names, for instance when Gonzalez(!) made his slam final he was playing incredibly well and beat del Potro, Hewitt, Blake, Nadal and Haas to get there, and as we all know Soderling was the first man to ever beat Nadal at the French before losing to Federer in the final. Is beating those players in slams finals less of an achievement than beating the 2015/6 versions of Murray and Federer? I think not.
 
Del Potro was fantastic player, shame we never saw him realize his full potential.
ZDwyr said:
In 2011-early 2012 I agree. Although he got a little lucky in 2008 because Tsonga took out Nadal and Federer had glandular fever. His last five have been won with pretty weak competition though

I think you underrate some of Federer's opponents. I think Roddick would certainly be top 8 if playing now, and would still be a genuine threat at Wimbledon and possibly the odd USO or AO.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. He looked better then because of lack of quality. Once better players came in, he slid down. He never reached Australian open final then so no chance he could now. Wimbledon he would have progressed till semis at best. He wasn't a bad player, but nothing special. Right now I agree that Djokovic's competition is not that strong but he did well in 2011-12 and proved his caliber against arguably the toughest pool of players. Federer never could dominate once Nadal and Djokovic rose. Age excuse I won't agree with much given he is still playing and reaching semis and that in last 7 years he has won just twice.
 
Giggsy92 said:
Think I've said before on here that 2003-5 Roddick would win Wimbledon against this field. And people shouldn't just look at the names, for instance when Gonzalez(!) made his slam final he was playing incredibly well and beat del Potro, Hewitt, Blake, Nadal and Haas to get there, and as we all know Soderling was the first man to ever beat Nadal at the French before losing to Federer in the final. Is beating those players in slams finals less of an achievement than beating the 2015/6 versions of Murray and Federer? I think not.
Click to expand...

I think Soderling was another very good player. Better than Wawrinka for me and was much more consistent. He just had peak Nadal and Federer to contend with. Even the likes of Murray and Djokovic had mental issues when facing them two during that period.
 
Giggsy92 said:
Think I've said before on here that 2003-5 Roddick would win Wimbledon against this field. And people shouldn't just look at the names, for instance when Gonzalez(!) made his slam final he was playing incredibly well and beat del Potro, Hewitt, Blake, Nadal and Haas to get there, and as we all know Soderling was the first man to ever beat Nadal at the French before losing to Federer in the final. Is beating those players in slams finals less of an achievement than beating the 2015/6 versions of Murray and Federer? I think not.
Click to expand...

Rafael Nadal was 21 years old then and still improving his game on other surfaces. Blake's best achievement ever is quarters. Del Potro was 19 then and unseeded. Hewitt was seeded 19th. Ya Gonzalez had a good tournament, as did Soderling when Fed won French but these are not the kind of players you hold any hope for when they reach final against a real top player.Gonzalez apart from that final has reached semis just once in his whole career. Gonzalez, Soderling etc are limited ability players who once in a while have a good run. Federer beating them in his prime is nothing special. At least not even close to the kind of players Djokovic still has to get past right now.
 
I don't think there's too much to separate Nadal, Federer & Djokovic tbh. It's pretty tight up there.

Personally I think, Nadal's career and legacy is a lot more epic than any of the other twos though. He was still essentially a kid when he rose up to challenge Federer's dominance, became a complete force between 2008-2010 and again managed a renaissance in 2013 to overcome Djokovic.
 
Skills said:
I don't think there's too much to separate Nadal, Federer & Djokovic tbh. It's pretty tight up there.

Personally I think, Nadal's career and legacy is a lot more epic than any of the other twos though. He was still essentially a kid when he rose up to challenge Federer's dominance, became a complete force between 2008-2010 and again managed a renaissance in 2013 to overcome Djokovic.
Click to expand...
Yeah I won't rate Djokovic above Fed yet but he is getting very close. Agree that Nadal's is standout especially when you see the injuries he has had and he as a teenager was told he will not be able to play at highest level due to injury. From there to 14 slams, minimum 2 on all courts, and beating greatest ever Grass court player at Wimbledon is remarkable. He progressively got better vs Fed at Wimbledon. Fed progressively got worse vs Nadal at French.
 
Del Potro would've probably ended up being at Murray's level or thereabouts. I've got no way of knowing, of course, but I can't see him being able to challenge Novak, had he stayed fit. Although, with his style, I suppose he'd have a better chance against him than Murray.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.