Tennis 2023

Who the feck is T Paul and how did he make it to a Grandlslam semi final? Men’s game seems to be in a bad shape right now
 
I think this year, if he gets lucky with injuries, Nole might do a Slam Poker. Can't see any other tennis player at his level atm, Nadal seems to been caught by the age already.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
My interest has waned over the last couple of years. You make it sound like he’s a household name.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I sound arrogant, I didn't mean it to "sound" like that. I was just asking because usually when you follow a sport you usually know a lot of players from the Top 50 - 100. They become regular faces at ATP tournaments.
 
André Dominguez said:
Sorry if I sound arrogant, I didn't mean it to "sound" like that. I was just asking because usually when you follow a sport you usually know a lot of players from the Top 50 - 100. They become regular faces at ATP tournaments.
Click to expand...
I’d say with Federer’s career winding down my interesting has gone. It’ll probably be lit up again when the field isn’t Djokovic, Spanish wonderkid and other fellas. I was just surprised to see Djokovic not playing someone more reknown in the semis.
 
No. 22 incoming. He probably overtakes Nadal when the year is done. This while he skipped two slams because of being stubborn and stupid.

The final boss.
 
Kevin said:
No. 22 incoming. He probably overtakes Nadal when the year is done. The final boss.
Click to expand...
He will do the poker, if injuries won't stop him. Next season is another story, age starts to weight heavier every year at his current age, it becomes a bit unpredictable.
 
When Djokovic snatched the Wimbledon title in 2019 away from Federer, I assumed that he would end up ahead of both Federer and Nadal in the slam race, though I personally hoped that he wouldn't (though I didn't dislike him as much back then as I did post-pandemic). I wouldn't have minded too much had all 3 players ended up with 20 grand slam titles apiece, before Nadal and Djokovic had other ideas and continued to add to their totals.

To be honest I think he is already greater than Nadal even with one fewer grand slam title, given his superior record in the YEC (a record equaling 6 YEC titles definitely outweigh's Nadal's Olympic gold medal), masters series events (including winning every masters series event at least twice) and world no. 1 ranking stats, plus the fact that held all 4 slams (plus the YEC) at the same time for a few weeks in 2016.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Who the feck is T Paul and how did he make it to a Grandlslam semi final? Men’s game seems to be in a bad shape right now
Click to expand...
He was in a pretty weak section of the draw and when Fritz went out, it could have been any body to be honest. When the draw isn't balanced and one or two seeds go out you can get a random semi-finalist like Paul. It doesn't happen to often but Karatsev was an even more random one to make the SF in Australia a couple of years ago.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I’d say with Federer’s career winding down my interesting has gone. It’ll probably be lit up again when the field isn’t Djokovic, Spanish wonderkid and other fellas. I was just surprised to see Djokovic not playing someone more reknown in the semis.
Click to expand...

Legends come and go, and the sport goes on. Nadal is already feeling the weight of being a veteran, and Nole will feel that too sooner than people think. It's the law of nature (and human body physics).
Alcaraz is not a household name yet. He did a very good season last year, but he still has a lot to prove. The amount of young guns who do one amazing season in their entire careers is not low.
 
Related to Tommy Paul, but while I'm not from the US I do think the sport will better off with US male players doing well and competing more regularly at the highest level again, and at least disrupting the heavy European dominance.

Ultimately tennis is going to be attract more interest in any country when players from that country do well and compete for and win big titles, and the US is the biggest consumer / media market in the world after all. Clearly though it will never come close to reaching the levels of popularity that it enjoyed in the US during the late 70s - early 80s, which was its absolute golden age there.
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
When Djokovic snatched the Wimbledon title in 2019 away from Federer, I assumed that he would end up ahead of both Federer and Nadal in the slam race, though I personally hoped that he wouldn't (though I didn't dislike him as much back then as I did post-pandemic). I wouldn't have minded too much had all 3 players ended up with 20 grand slam titles apiece, before Nadal and Djokovic had other ideas and continued to add to their totals.

To be honest I think he is already greater than Nadal even with one fewer grand slam title, given his superior record in the YEC (a record equaling 6 YEC titles definitely outweigh's Nadal's Olympic gold medal), masters series events (including winning every masters series event at least twice) and world no. 1 ranking stats, plus the fact that held all 4 slams (plus the YEC) at the same time for a few weeks in 2016.
Click to expand...

Even though I'm not a particular fan of his playing style, he clearly is the best human to play tennis so far. His major asset is his flexibility and pinpointing: he generates so much power while stretched and overstreched that his opponents a lot of times are forced to try 3 or 4 winners to get a point against him, when against other players 1 would be enough.

And the precision he has while hitting "stretched" is terrific. Adding to this his offensive game is very efficient, makes him an opponent that will break you mentally because he will reach all those hard hits.
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
Related to Tommy Paul, but while I'm not from the US I do think the sport will better off with US male players doing well and competing more regularly at the highest level again, and at least disrupting the heavy European dominance.

Ultimately tennis is going to be attract more interest in any country when players from that country do well and compete for and win big titles, and the US is the biggest consumer / media market in the world after all. Clearly though it will never come close to reaching the levels of popularity that it enjoyed in the US during the late 70s - early 80s, which was its absolute golden age there.
Click to expand...

Agree, the american audience is vital for this sport. Things are changing: the american tennis school was still very "old-school", a lot of serve & volley and hard hits to shut the shop ASAP, which made US tennis players exposed to opponents who are great at "screening" the baseline and train flexibility to have more power while they are stretching to hit the ball. When you keep trying winners, you must be very consistent and it is hard to be consistent in those kind of hits, because the margin of error is bigger.

About the popularity: tennis has to compete with much more sports nowadays, it's a natural thing to happen.
 
Who was the last truly exciting US male tennis player who wasnt a 1 dimensional hard hitter. Agassi?
 
André Dominguez said:
Even though I'm not a particular fan of his playing style, he clearly is the best human to play tennis so far. His major asset is his flexibility and pinpointing: he generates so much power while stretched and overstreched that his opponents a lot of times are forced to try 3 or 4 winners to get a point against him, when against other players 1 would be enough.

And the precision he has while hitting "stretched" is terrific. Adding to this his offensive game is very efficient, makes him an opponent that will break you mentally because he will reach all those hard hits.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I remember watching him outclass Berdych, Federer and Murray to win the Australian Open title in 2011, and thinking at that stage that it was the best balance of / transitional between attacking and defensive tennis that I'd seen. I personally enjoyed watching Federer and Nadal more (plus numerous other players in the past), but I thought that Djokovic at his best was an even better player than either of them at their best.

Also I think that given how modern day tennis is incredibly hard court centric (excessively so in my opinion), with significantly more strength in depth on hard courts compared to clay or grass (the depth on grass these days is particularly bad), winning a hard court grand slam 9 (or potentially 10) times is an insane achievement.
 
In spite of the pessimism, we have two good finals ahead: Rybakina vs Sabalenka was one of the noblest matches still available after the exit of so many seeded players, while Djokovic vs Tsitsipas is a golden opportunity for both players to claim a breakthrough in their career, albeit at very different level. All in all, better than feared by many.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Who was the last truly exciting US male tennis player who wasnt a 1 dimensional hard hitter. Agassi?
Click to expand...

In terms of elite players, there haven't been many since Sampras (who during his earlier years including when he won his breakthrough 1990 US Open title was the textbook definition of an all-court players) or Agassi. Max Cressy nowadays is fun to watch and has a different style, serve-volleying a lot, but he hasn't broken into the ATP top 30.

During his early years when coached by Nick Bollettieri, Agassi was kind of a ball basher, though an insanely talented one. The 18 year period or so from March 1994 after Brad Gilbert became his coach until the 1995 US Open final (his defeat to Sampras in that match triggered a sharp decline) was when was at his very best IMO, combining devastating attacking ability from both the forehand and baseline side, with significantly improved tactical and defensive play (plus his dropshot improved) as well. Agassi winning Wimbledon from the baseline in 1992 was pretty historic, when basically everyone else was serve-volleying a lot at that tournament (even if they played more from the baseline away from grass).
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
Agreed.

I remember watching him outclass Berdych, Federer and Murray to win the Australian Open title in 2011, and thinking at that stage that it was the best balance of / transitional between attacking and defensive tennis that I'd seen. I personally enjoyed watching Federer and Nadal more (plus numerous other players in the past), but I thought that Djokovic at his best was an even better player than either of them at their best.

Also I think that given how modern day tennis is incredibly hard court centric (excessively so in my opinion), with significantly more strength in depth on hard courts compared to clay or grass (the depth on grass these days is particularly bad), winning a hard court grand slam 9 (or potentially 10) times is an insane achievement.
Click to expand...

Also enjoyed a bit more Federer: his style was very offensive, he was constantly attacking, which made the match much more enjoyable to watch. His service was not very powerful, but was extremely accurate, his volleys were probably the best I've seen and he had a lot of different approaches on his locker.
But Nadal and Djokovic playing style almost perfectly fit Federer style, which made him loosing more matches than winning against them. He would have to be extremely consistent almost in super human levels to impose his style over them. But his career wouldn't be as good if he tried to play like Nole or Nadal, IMO.
 
Djokovic very average today. Probably his dad's shenanigans affected him. Will need to raise level a bit in the final to beat Stef. That match will be interesting. Stef will need Djokovic to drop the level and today match showed that Novak can drop the level and spray errors. Very unusual display today and I hope one bad match was in order after two very good performances against ADM and Rublev.
 
ExoduS said:
Djokovic very average today. Probably his dad's shenanigans affected him. Will need to raise level a bit in the final to beat Stef. That match will be interesting. Stef will need Djokovic to drop the level and today match showed that Novak can drop the level and spray errors. Very unusual display today and I hope one bad match was in order after two very good performances against ADM and Rublev.
Click to expand...

He will win, worry not. Tsitsipas, depite being very talented, will not be consistent enough to surpass Nole returns. He always tries to solve the points very quickly and against a player like Nole that usually doesn't work that well.
 
André Dominguez said:
Legends come and go, and the sport goes on. Nadal is already feeling the weight of being a veteran, and Nole will feel that too sooner than people think. It's the law of nature (and human body physics).
Alcaraz is not a household name yet. He did a very good season last year, but he still has a lot to prove. The amount of young guns who do one amazing season in their entire careers is not low.
Click to expand...
Yes but interesting in it from everyone doesn’t remain a constant.
 
Bepi said:
In spite of the pessimism, we have two good finals ahead: Rybakina vs Sabalenka was one of the noblest matches still available after the exit of so many seeded players, while Djokovic vs Tsitsipas is a golden opportunity for both players to claim a breakthrough in their career, albeit at very different level. All in all, better than feared by many.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Hopefully the finals won't be duds though Djokovic and Rybakina could steamroll their opponents. World number 1 ranking on the line in the mens final as well.
 
Desert Eagle said:
Agreed. Hopefully the finals won't be duds though Djokovic and Rybakina could steamroll their opponents. World number 1 ranking on the line in the mens final as well.
Click to expand...

Both three sets, Sabalenka for me in tomorrow's. Djokovic will steamroll Tsitsipas, agree.

I'm pretty happy that I can get up at a normal time for a few days now though. I'm too old for this 1am shit.
 
Compelling girls final between the two young Russian girls. Hope they both become good pros.
 
Great match by the women so far. Rybakina took the first and now Sabalenka up a break in the second.
 
Sabalenka has a 3-0 H2H, winning all three matches in 3 sets. The only change today is that Rybakina won the first set for a change. I think the momentum of the 2nd set will see through Sabalenka through but lets see.
 
The second set seems like a combination of Sabalenka learning Rybakina's serve while Rybakina also missing more first serves which gave Sabalenka more chances. Rybakina will need to raise her first serve percentage.
 
Watching this game it's really 100% up to Sabalenka who wins here. Power difference is huge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.