Tennis Volume 8: Is a FedEx delivery coming?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, 3CityApache said:

I for one hate his usual "oh, I'm so badly injured" play almost every time something goes bad for him on court. His anti-vaccine remarks don't help either. Plus, his style of play is simply least entertaining of the three. Fed is simply an artist, Rafa is a cyborg bending reality. Djoko just returns every ball.

I'd call Joker the cyborg. Rafa is the gladiator.

Joker is unlikeable for many of the reasons Murray was. He behaves poorly on the court in a way you rarely ever see Rafa or Feds do. And I agree, his behavior during the COVID dark times has not won him any support. Still, of the three, he'd probably be the most fun to spend some time with. Rafa is my favorite men's player ever, but I don't think I'd want to hang out with him for more than a short bit of time. Feds would be more interesting, but I can still see that wearing out quickly. Joker is funny when he's in a good mood, and could legit be fun to hang around when he wasn't being an asshole. 

[BigFatCoward]

40 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'd call Joker the cyborg. Rafa is the gladiator.

Joker is unlikeable for many of the reasons Murray was. He behaves poorly on the court in a way you rarely ever see Rafa or Feds do. And I agree, his behavior during the COVID dark times has not won him any support. Still, of the three, he'd probably be the most fun to spend some time with. Rafa is my favorite men's player ever, but I don't think I'd want to hang out with him for more than a short bit of time. Feds would be more interesting, but I can still see that wearing out quickly. Joker is funny when he's in a good mood, and could legit be fun to hang around when he wasn't being an asshole. 

This, but Murray is a top boy off the court. 

Also to your earlier point ranking Rafa no 1, on clay clearly, on any other court he isnt in the conversation. 

Each of the 3 is best on one surface, though Nadal is the weakest on 2. 

And saying fed was lucky to win all his tournaments before the other 2 arrived is a bit odd, Djokovic has won more than 75% of his slam tournaments since Fed turned 30. It works both ways. 

 

[3CityApache]

16 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

And saying fed was lucky to win all his tournaments before the other 2 arrived is a bit odd, Djokovic has won more than 75% of his slam tournaments since Fed turned 30. It works both ways. 

Exactly, I'm pretty sure his head-to-heads with both Djoko and Rafa would be much more close-fought if he wasn't a good few years older.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

12 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

This, but Murray is a top boy off the court. 

Perhaps. I really can't say. But as someone not from the UK, he was really unlikeable until he won the London Olympics and you understood just how much pressure he was under.

Quote

Also to your earlier point ranking Rafa no 1, on clay clearly, on any other court he isnt in the conversation. 

Each of the 3 is best on one surface, though Nadal is the weakest on 2. 

And saying fed was lucky to win all his tournaments before the other 2 arrived is a bit odd, Djokovic has won more than 75% of his slam tournaments since Fed turned 30. It works both ways. 

And yet at the same time, he clearly dominated his surface in a way that sets him apart and he could beat the other on theirs. 

To your last point, that's why Nadal is the best. He took it to both of them in their primes. Feds racked them up before he became a legend and Joker is catching him a lot after his prime has past.  

[BigFatCoward]

30 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

 

To your last point, that's why Nadal is the best. He took it to both of them in their primes. Feds racked them up before he became a legend and Joker is catching him a lot after his prime has past.  

Ijust cant have have him as best when there are 3 main surfaces and he was weakest on 2 of them. Notwithstanding the fact that Rafa on clay may be the greatest sportsman who ever lived. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

50 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Ijust cant have have him as best when there are 3 main surfaces and he was weakest on 2 of them. Notwithstanding the fact that Rafa on clay may be the greatest sportsman who ever lived. 

But that's just the thing, he has completely dominated one of the three surfaces. You can argue he's the weakest of the three on the other two, but he owns the others on his, and it's not like he can't win on grass or the hardcourts. Also, of the three, he's the one that dealt with serious injury issues during his prime.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

This looks like a fun goofball of a match. Early on both players are firing lasers and making a ton of mistakes.

[Jeor]

Women's tennis has changed a lot since the serve-volley Jana Novotna and Steffi Graf's slice backhand. Osaka and Williams are absolutely pounding the ball at each other. Looks like Osaka will take this, though - her game (big serve, big groundstrokes) is like Serena's except 16 years younger.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, Jeor said:

Women's tennis has changed a lot since the serve-volley Jana Novotna and Steffi Graf's slice backhand. Osaka and Williams are absolutely pounding the ball at each other. Looks like Osaka will take this, though - her game (big serve, big groundstrokes) is like Serena's except 16 years younger.

Yep. I'm still frustrated by all the small mistakes Serena makes. She's always done this, but could serve her way out of it. That's not the case anymore, and like I said a few years back, her movement on the baseline is totally gone. Osaka should clean this up within in the next 30-45 minutes.  

[Jeor]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Yep. I'm still frustrated by all the small mistakes Serena makes. She's always done this, but could serve her way out of it. That's not the case anymore, and like I said a few years back, her movement on the baseline is totally gone. Osaka should clean this up within in the next 30-45 minutes.  

Yes, Serena's lack of lateral movement is her biggest weakness and that's her age coming into it. She can still hit winners and aces when the match is on her terms, but her defensive tennis is no longer there. In her prime, Serena could chase down balls and still hit big, scrambling but quickly turning rallies from losing positions into winning ones. Against lesser opponents, it's not so obvious, but when the ball is coming at you at the high-octane speed that Osaka is hitting, it really exposes Serena's declining defensive skills.

[Free Northman Reborn]

It is highly likely that Nadal will overtake Federer’s Grand Slam count. The question is whether Novak will do the same.

Personally I expect the long term debate about the greatest tennis player ever to be between Nadal and Djokovic, once both have exceeded Federer’s major title count.

And I don’t think that question can be answered yet, as the final chapters still have to be written.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, Jeor said:

Yes, Serena's lack of lateral movement is her biggest weakness and that's her age coming into it. She can still hit winners and aces when the match is on her terms, but her defensive tennis is no longer there. In her prime, Serena could chase down balls and still hit big, scrambling but quickly turning rallies from losing positions into winning ones. Against lesser opponents, it's not so obvious, but when the ball is coming at you at the high-octane speed that Osaka is hitting, it really exposes Serena's declining defensive skills.

In my eyes it's scary just how good Osaka can be. She still seems to be only figuring out the basics. I expect her to run the women's game for the next five to ten years.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

It is highly likely that Nadal will overtake Federer’s Grand Slam count. The question is whether Novak will do the same.

Personally I expect the long term debate about the greatest tennis player ever to be between Nadal and Djokovic, once both have exceeded Federer’s major title count.

And I don’t think that question can be answered yet, as the final chapters still have to be written.

I expect Joker to own the Slams record between the three. His consistency should win out. But I don't think he should ever be seen as the best.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

I expect Joker to own the Slams record between the three. His consistency should win out. But I don't think he should ever be seen as the best.

Dislike is not a reason to avoid acknowledging someone as the best. I can’t stand Serena Williams but she is clearly the best female player ever.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Dislike is not a reason to avoid acknowledging someone as the best. I can’t stand Serena Williams but she is clearly the best female player ever.

 

Look a few posts up. I said of the three he's the one I'd probably like to spend time with if I didn't have a choice. I just find his game to be kind of boring. Nadal is the most fun on the court, for better, and sometimes, worse. 

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

My concern is that the youngsters like Thiem and Tsitsipas are becoming very difficult to beat for Novak and Nadal. Age is catching up to them.

[baxus]

4 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

It is highly likely that Nadal will overtake Federer’s Grand Slam count. The question is whether Novak will do the same.

Personally I expect the long term debate about the greatest tennis player ever to be between Nadal and Djokovic, once both have exceeded Federer’s major title count.

And I don’t think that question can be answered yet, as the final chapters still have to be written.

I think that we'll start to fully appreciate their rivalry and insane quality of their game only after they retire.

Tennis has been in quite a privileged position, to have three of the best players in history overlap for so long. 

4 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

My concern is that the youngsters like Thiem and Tsitsipas are becoming very difficult to beat for Novak and Nadal. Age is catching up to them.

It was about time someone started beating the top three. They've dominated the field for well over a decade, if not two decades.

Not sure I'd say Thiem is a youngster at 27 years old, though. At that age, Nadal and Federer were at double digits grand slams, and Djokovic had 7. Just to illustrate the impact big three had on careers of generations of players to follow.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

7 hours ago, baxus said:

Tennis has been in quite a privileged position, to have three of the best players in history overlap for so long. 

On the men's side. I think the women's side will be fine going forward because as said above, as the best ever has her career sunset, her clone is rising and is ready to carry that side. But the men's side could be in a bad place in the near future. I think three years from now Feds and Nadal are retired, and Joker will not be the same. There's some nice players coming up behind them, but I'm not sure who the next star will be and it's unfair to expect them to live up to what we've seen.

The Big Three plus Serena may very well be the golden of golden ages in all of sport.

[Jeor]

The men's game will have a vacuum not just from a Slams and experience point of view, but from a charisma point of view as well. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are known worldwide and even by non-tennis fans. There's no one with that name recognition and superstar sort of status left after them.

Someone like Kyrgios (who I don't like) might have the potential to do it, if he were to become a bit more consistent and become a genuine Top 10 player. Maybe I'm doing them a disservice - in the absence of the Big Three, it may be that we hear more about and get to know Thiem, Medvedev, Zverev more and they break out in the public imagination. 

But this is likely to be the biggest generational break in a while. In the 90s there was a fairly consistent line where the No. 1 mantle passed but players stuck around. You had Becker/Edberg initially, then Courier, then Sampras and Agassi - but they all had quite a bit of overlap and played each other lots while still in the Top 10. There was an "orderly transition" as players retired and new players came in but not all at once. Other players like Thomas Muster, Michael Chang had long careers and there were people like Pat Rafter who popped up from time to time. There was a little bit of wilderness before Federer came along - Lleyton Hewitt sort of filled the breach for a bit.

 

[ljkeane]

2 hours ago, Jeor said:

 There was a little bit of wilderness before Federer came along - Lleyton Hewitt sort of filled the breach for a bit.

 

I don’t think there was that much of a gap. I remember Federer beating Sampras at Wimbledon being a bit of a holy shit I can’t believe that happened moment. I suppose there wasn’t much overlap though with Sampras retiring soon afterwards.