Tennis 2020

Only some Federer fans are touchy and like to call out Djokovic and Nadal as suspect. Even though Federer's 2017 AO win is the most suspect GS win of the past decade.

Most fans acknowledge all 3's greatness and that they likely have all (as have Murray, Thiem and countless others) taken PEDs. It is like pro cycling - Armstrong only got caught because he was a douche but obviously Wiggins and Froome both have been on PEDs.
 
Bojan11 said:
I think you need to go watch Nadal in 2008 and compare him to now before saying he’s on peds. He’s way faster in 2008 and would get onto anything.

He’s just way aggressive now and his serve has improved massively. Djokovic won most the longer rallies today.

@wr8_utd Thiem also has incredible stamina. Probably best on tour right now with Djokovic. Schwartzmann is up there too. Nishikori plays a lot of 5 setters. But yeah just funny how Federer fanboys accuse Djokovic and Nadal being on peds.
Click to expand...

PED's aren't just about speed, how that's just a very little reason why some use them. Generally it's more recovery and boosting blood levels to perform near their threshold for longer.

PS - I didn't accuse him of it. I just added my two cents.
 
Zen said:
PED's aren't just about speed, how that's just a very little reason why some use them. Generally it's more recovery and boosting blood levels to perform near their threshold for longer.

PS - I didn't accuse him of it. I just added my two cents.
Click to expand...

yeah exactly in a lot of sports it’s not about strength or speed but endurance, compare how it feels to hit a ball or kick something when you’re knackered compared to fresh, the less tired you are the less your technique takes a hit.
 
Novak wasn't even bad, but RG is simply Rafa's home. no other player has that aura of invinciblity in certain tournament like Rafa has when he plays here. you can say Djokovic is the king of Australia and Roger owns the Wimbledon, but they still lost plenty of matches there while Nadal lost 2 matches here in his whole career. I can't be arsed to search right now, but it would be interesting to see which tournaments exactly are these three the most dominant at. obviously Nadal is almost untouchable in RG and I know Djokovic literally can't lose at ATP China/Bejing, but what about Roger? does he have comparable dominance in particular tournament?
 
SinNombre said:
Only some Federer fans are touchy and like to call out Djokovic and Nadal as suspect. Even though Federer's 2017 AO win is the most suspect GS win of the past decade.

Most fans acknowledge all 3's greatness and that they likely have all (as have Murray, Thiem and countless others) taken PEDs. It is like pro cycling - Armstrong only got caught because he was a douche but obviously Wiggins and Froome both have been on PEDs.
Click to expand...
It's not hard to see why people would think Nadal' and Djokovic' style of tennis would benefit more from peds, since they're both defensive players.

Also, Im not a Federer fan, it is humanly possible to have opinions that do not spring from an inherent favor towards a player.

And for the record, I think none of em use peds, I was just winding things up.
 
KirkDuyt said:
It's not hard to see why people would think Nadal' and Djokovic' style of tennis would benefit more from peds, since they're both defensive players.

Also, Im not a Federer fan, it is humanly possible to have opinions that do not spring from an inherent favor towards a player.

And for the record, I think none of em use peds, I was just winding things up.
Click to expand...

PEDS would benefit every single tennis style.
 
KirkDuyt said:
It's not hard to see why people would think Nadal' and Djokovic' style of tennis would benefit more from peds, since they're both defensive players.

Also, Im not a Federer fan, it is humanly possible to have opinions that do not spring from an inherent favor towards a player.

And for the record, I think none of em use peds, I was just winding things up.
Click to expand...

Nadal was not defensive today. I don’t think you watched the game at all today or were watching a different game.

Nadal has changed his approach over the last few years to be more aggressive. His aggression today unsettled Djokovic, who started hitting unforced errors. Usually against Nadal, Djokovic is constantly attacking him and dictating the rallies. Today Nadal changed his approach and launched bombs with his back hand.

You don’t win the slams these two have just by being defensive players. Andy Murray is a great defensive player, but the reason he does not have more slams to his name besides the big three is because he was way too passive at times. He won his slams when he was aggressive. Look at Wawrinka, he’s won 3 slams playing lights out tennis. If he worked on his defensive side he would have more slams.

This myth that Djokovic and Nadal are just defensive players needs to die. Both of them have the right balance.
 
Bojan11 said:
This myth that Djokovic and Nadal are just defensive players needs to die. Both of them have the right balance.
Click to expand...

It is only a Federer fans myth tbh.

Most of the modern generation of tennis players look up to Djokovic and Nadal.

You don't win all the trophies while fighting each other without having the right balance.

Wawinka's style is not sustainable, though how great was it to watch at its best.
 
Most suspicious about Nadal is complaining about anti doping tests, bigging up Contador as a great champion when he was handed his retroactive ban and disqualified from the Grand Tours and the fact that Fuentes hinted at customers from Tennis as well.
The fact that people immidiately assume criticism to only come from Federer fans just proves @KirkDuyt point that the fan war is about as bad as Ronaldo/Messi.
 
Bojan11 said:
Nadal was not defensive today. I don’t think you watched the game at all today or were watching a different game.

Nadal has changed his approach over the last few years to be more aggressive. His aggression today unsettled Djokovic, who started hitting unforced errors. Usually against Nadal, Djokovic is constantly attacking him and dictating the rallies. Today Nadal changed his approach and launched bombs with his back hand.

You don’t win the slams these two have just by being defensive players. Andy Murray is a great defensive player, but the reason he does not have more slams to his name besides the big three is because he was way too passive at times. He won his slams when he was aggressive. Look at Wawrinka, he’s won 3 slams playing lights out tennis. If he worked on his defensive side he would have more slams.

This myth that Djokovic and Nadal are just defensive players needs to die. Both of them have the right balance.
Click to expand...
Nadal is not an offensive player. I mean, I know tennis has evolved into a baseline sport over the years, but Nadal plays defensively. He's basically in the stands in the average rally. There's a different between defensive and Coralina Wozniacky you know. It's also not meant as a slight on him, but endurance plays a bigger part in his game than it does to someone he plays a lot of serve and volley and generally tends to approach the net to cut a rally short.

Early career Murray was just an efficient ball pusher, he evolved somewhat in the later years, but there was never a big four if you ask me. He's never been a real threat to the other 3. Nadal amd Djokovic are some of the best ever due to their insane consistency and unbreakable mental toughness. That's not saying they cannot hit amazing winners, but neither classify as attacking tennis players, they really don't.
 
I'd classify Nadal has someone who used to be defensive but who is now an attacking player. He just looks to dominate from the baseline.

Djokovic's probably more defensive but could be classified as neutral which is also why many find his style unattractive.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Nadal is not an offensive player. I mean, I know tennis has evolved into a baseline sport over the years, but Nadal plays defensively. He's basically in the stands in the average rally. There's a different between defensive and Coralina Wozniacky you know. It's also not meant as a slight on him, but endurance plays a bigger part in his game than it does to someone he plays a lot of serve and volley and generally tends to approach the net to cut a rally short.

Early career Murray was just an efficient ball pusher, he evolved somewhat in the later years, but there was never a big four if you ask me. He's never been a real threat to the other 3. Nadal amd Djokovic are some of the best ever due to their insane consistency and unbreakable mental toughness. That's not saying they cannot hit amazing winners, but neither classify as attacking tennis players, they really don't.
Click to expand...

Stopped reading after that.

I don’t think you bothered watching or seen any of the adjustments he has made to his game compared to his early years. You don’t win 20 slams by being a defensive player. I’m sure David Ferrer would have won one if that was the case.
 
Bojan11 said:
Stopped reading after that.

I don’t think you bothered watching or seen any of the adjustments he has made to his game compared to his early years. You don’t win 20 slams by being a defensive player. I’m sure David Ferrer would have won one if that was the case.
Click to expand...
Such a weird attitude to have on a discussion forum. You do you though mate. Great knowledge and understanding may it bring you.

I'm willing to put a tenner towards you having read my whole post though ;)
 
Bojan11 said:
Nadal was not defensive today. I don’t think you watched the game at all today or were watching a different game.

Nadal has changed his approach over the last few years to be more aggressive. His aggression today unsettled Djokovic, who started hitting unforced errors. Usually against Nadal, Djokovic is constantly attacking him and dictating the rallies. Today Nadal changed his approach and launched bombs with his back hand.

You don’t win the slams these two have just by being defensive players. Andy Murray is a great defensive player, but the reason he does not have more slams to his name besides the big three is because he was way too passive at times. He won his slams when he was aggressive. Look at Wawrinka, he’s won 3 slams playing lights out tennis. If he worked on his defensive side he would have more slams.

This myth that Djokovic and Nadal are just defensive players needs to die. Both of them have the right balance.
Click to expand...
It's obviously nonsense that comes from Federer fans who haven't been able to come to terms with the fact that they couldn't have Roddick and Hewitt to compete with their entire careers. Nadal and Djokovic can transition from defense to attack brilliantly and we've seen that a lot over the years. Nadal played tennis on the front foot both vs Diego and Novak in these last two matches. He's just smart enough to know what way to play in which match.
 
wr8_utd said:
It's obviously nonsense that comes from Federer fans who haven't been able to come to terms with the fact that they couldn't have Roddick and Hewitt to compete with their entire careers. Nadal and Djokovic can transition from defense to attack brilliantly and we've seen that a lot over the years. Nadal played tennis on the front foot both vs Diego and Novak in these last two matches. He's just smart enough to know what way to play in which match.
Click to expand...
:lol: I give up.
 
It's ridiculous what some people come up with to put these guys down.
They are tested before every match, train obsessively and build their lifestyles around tennis. With all the technological advancements in sports these days, their longevity is within the realm of the modern game.

Else you should also include Ronaldo and Zlatan as beneficiaries of PEDs.

Tennis is a significantly more intense sport and requires more endurance and athleticism, but as has been said many times, what separates the big 3 and a few others is their mental strength.
The mindset to hold your game together for 5 hours instead of 3, to shrug off a lost set when you're playing well, to push your body even further past its breaking point.

I don't think, aside from Novak, that there is a big difference between the players physically, but mentally, there is a massive difference.
 
MattofManchester said:
It's ridiculous what some people come up with to put these guys down.
They are tested before every match, train obsessively and build their lifestyles around tennis. With all the technological advancements in sports these days, their longevity is within the realm of the modern game.

Else you should also include Ronaldo and Zlatan as beneficiaries of PEDs.

Tennis is a significantly more intense sport and requires more endurance and athleticism, but as has been said many times, what separates the big 3 and a few others is their mental strength.
The mindset to hold your game together for 5 hours instead of 3, to shrug off a lost set when you're playing well, to push your body even further past its breaking point.

I don't think, aside from Novak, that there is a big difference between the players physically, but mentally, there is a massive difference.
Click to expand...
This. When it comes to "doping" and the ability to run and run for 5-6 hours, even the likes of Murray, Thiem and Medvedev are more the capable of it. Unless you think all of tennis is doping?
 
KirkDuyt said:
Such a weird attitude to have on a discussion forum. You do you though mate. Great knowledge and understanding may it bring you.
Click to expand...

He already has a better knowledge of tennis, than you will.

Post-2014 Nadal is an attacking baseliner. People somehow think servebots or serve and volleying is the only attacking game.

There is a reason why he is now losing the matchup to Federer. Part of it is Federer's improved backhand but a lot of it is Nadal can't run as much and has had to evolve his game.
 
SinNombre said:
He already has a better knowledge of tennis, than you will.

Post-2014 Nadal is an attacking baseliner. People somehow think servebots or serve and volleying is the only attacking game.

There is a reason why he is now losing the matchup to Federer. Part of it is Federer's improved backhand but a lot of it is Nadal can't run as much and has had to evolve his game.
Click to expand...
So you wouldn't say Nadal's ability to return virtually every shot, due to his fantastic movement and variation is a big assett to his game? He has developed his attacking tools throughout his career into one of the best players of all time, so he's obviously not just a ball pusher, but his foundation is still one originating from his unparralleded defense.

I see you also feel the urge to open a post with a personal attack. It's unnecessary and a bit silly. Surely we can be civil about a game of tennis.
 
SinNombre said:
He already has a better knowledge of tennis, than you will.

Post-2014 Nadal is an attacking baseliner. People somehow think servebots or serve and volleying is the only attacking game.

There is a reason why he is now losing the matchup to Federer. Part of it is Federer's improved backhand but a lot of it is Nadal can't run as much and has had to evolve his game.
Click to expand...
You could say 2010 Nadal and 2013 Nadal also involved very attacking styles of play. A dominating serve, return and planting himself on the baseline.

2010 Nadal is personally the highest level of tennis I've seen.

Yes, yes, I know, many will disagree with that.
 
KirkDuyt said:
So you wouldn't say Nadal's ability to return virtually every shot, due to his fantastic movement and variation is a big assett to his game? He has developed his attacking tools throughout his career into one of the best players of all time, so he's obviously not just a ball pusher, but his foundation is still one originating from his unparralleded defense.

I see you also feel the urge to open a post with a personal attack. It's unnecessary and a bit silly. Surely we can be civil about a game of tennis.
Click to expand...

Well you could have been civil to bojan instead of being passive-aggressive but ok, I shouldn't take the bait :)

As for Nadal, we are talking about a 16 year career at this point with multiple major injuries and having to adjust to Djokovic's emergence. There is no one Nadal style as Matt's post below also mentions.

Obviously, I remember the teenaged Nadal whose game off-clay was purely based on scrambling and trying to return every shot. We haven't seen that in more than a decade.

MattofManchester said:
You could say 2010 Nadal and 2013 Nadal also involved very attacking styles of play. A dominating serve, return and planting himself on the baseline.

2010 Nadal is personally the highest level of tennis I've seen.

Yes, yes, I know, many will disagree with that.
Click to expand...

2013 Nadal was the best serving Nadal.

For people who argue having a big serve is not a weapon on fast surfaces, you should point them to 2013 HC Nadal. He was unstoppable on HC that summer purely because he was getting so many free points on serve.

2010 Nadal was the best returning Nadal. Djokovic was able to beat that in 2011 so I find it hard to call that his highest level.
 
SinNombre said:
Well you could have been civil to bojan instead of being passive-aggressive but ok, I shouldn't take the bait :)

As for Nadal, we are talking about a 16 year career at this point with multiple major injuries and having to adjust to Djokovic's emergence. There is no one Nadal style as Matt's post below also mentions.

Obviously, I remember the teenaged Nadal whose game off-clay was purely based on scrambling and trying to return every shot. We haven't seen that in more than a decade.



2013 Nadal was the best serving Nadal.

For people who argue having a big serve is not a weapon on fast surfaces, you should point them to 2013 HC Nadal. He was unstoppable on HC that summer purely because he was getting so many free points on serve.

2010 Nadal was the best returning Nadal. Djokovic was able to beat that in 2011 so I find it hard to call that his highest level.
Click to expand...
Yeah ok fair enough I was being a bit of a tit. Either way, Nadal is a brilliant player, there were parts of the first 2 sets today when I half expected Djokovic to just say feck this and walk out of there.

I'd say in the end both Nadal and Djokovic are better modern day tennis players than Federer. I'd give Nadal the nod above Djoko but there's not much betweem them. Federer can only compete when his first serve is working well.
 
KirkDuyt said:
So you wouldn't say Nadal's ability to return virtually every shot, due to his fantastic movement and variation is a big assett to his game? He has developed his attacking tools throughout his career into one of the best players of all time, so he's obviously not just a ball pusher, but his foundation is still one originating from his unparralleded defense.

I see you also feel the urge to open a post with a personal attack. It's unnecessary and a bit silly. Surely we can be civil about a game of tennis.
Click to expand...
I think you are doing this thing where you come over as a neanderthaeler knowledge-wise about this sport but still push opinions as if you have played and followed it since you were 5. The highlighted part just seems to confirm this as this is clearly a sport you have far less interest and involvement in compared to your main (football), yet you still come over as a wijsneus (as we dutch would say it) in this thread. This is how you are getting under their skin.

You are far more well spoken and less 'weird' in the football threads.
 
Kevin said:
I think you are doing this thing where you come over as a neanderthaeler knowledge-wise about this sport but still push opinions as if you have played and followed it since you were 5. The highlighted part just seems to confirm this as this is clearly a sport you have far less interest and involvement in compared to your main (football), yet you still come over as a wijsneus (as we dutch would say it) in this thread. This is how you are getting under their skin.

You are far more well spoken and less 'weird' in the football threads.
Click to expand...
I actually played tennis when I was 5 :wenger:

Either way, I'm definitely no expert on either tennis or football, and admitted I was being a tit in the beginning. However, the post you quoted about Nadal developing himself around his amazing defense is something I won't concede. It's just hard to judge these guys on a normal standard. Nadal is probably a better all out attacking tennis player than probably 95% of the tour, but that doesn't necessarily makes his gameplan purely offensive.

I can definitely come across as an annoying wijsneus though, so if I caused offense, sorry. I'm always in a bad mood when Oranje does poorly, so blame Frank de Boer.
 
KirkDuyt said:
I actually played tennis when I was 5 :wenger:

Either way, I'm definitely no expert on either tennis or football, and admitted I was being a tit in the beginning. However, the post you quoted about Nadal developing himself around his amazing defense is something I won't concede. It's just hard to judge these guys on a normal standard. Nadal is probably a better all out attacking tennis player than probably 95% of the tour, but that doesn't necessarily makes his gameplan purely offensive.

I can definitely come across as an annoying wijsneus though, so if I caused offense, sorry.
Click to expand...
I only bolded the part where you came over as patronizing the sport and the posters you were arguing with, it sort of is a culmination of the tone you set in some of the earlier posts in this thread. I agree with the particular point you made in the post I quoted.
 
Kevin said:
I only bolded the part where you came over as patronizing the sport and the posters you were arguing with, it sort of is a culmination of the tone you set in some of the earlier posts in this thread. I agree with the particular point you made in the post I quoted.
Click to expand...
Yeah it sounds cnutish when I read it back. Not my proudest moment.
 
Coric lost to Rublev in St. Peteresburg as well. That's his 4th title of the year!
 
Don't line judges get paid for their work? Isn't that considered their employment?

I'm just wondering if their removal from the game will basically count as a job loss.
 
MattofManchester said:
Don't line judges get paid for their work? Isn't that considered their employment?

I'm just wondering if their removal from the game will basically count as a job loss.
Click to expand...
I believe it is paid work but I think it would be considered as temporary work as they won't be travelling across the world for different tournaments like players or umpires do.
 
MattofManchester said:
Apparently, according to Rublev, Thiem has got issues with his foot. The same injury as in the US Open.

I saw the Djokovic match though. Sonego played incredible tennis. Hardly missed any of his shots. Was just one of those days for Novak.
Click to expand...
Yep every match has his story (Evans has a good season too) but on the paper everyone will be surprised about the results :smirk:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.