Tennis: ATP/WTA Tour 2014

[zep1706]

Nadal lost to Ferrer. Terrible tennis from Nadal. I don't see him winning RG this year. I think this will be his first year without a slam. Won at least one slam 9 years in a row, it has to stop at some point.

[bones]

Over reaction. I wouldn't be too worried about Nadal yet. It's if he fails in Barca, Madrid and Rome that you'd be concerned. What would be a failure for him? I'd say not making 2 finals and not winning at least 1 of them. Monte Carlo last year Nadal was beaten easily too. It's an interesting time. I think Nadal isn't coping with the act of being chased well, I get the feeling he much prefers chasing the top man. Both semis should be crackers.

[adi B]

Nadal lost to Ferrer. Terrible tennis from Nadal. I don't see him winning RG this year. I think this will be his first year without a slam. Won at least one slam 9 years in a row' date=' it has to stop at some point.[/quote'] i think we have to accept now that nadal wont win GS in the same rate he did in the past.he will be 28 in a month(especially with that mileage) ,nadal looks tired but he will give it all in the RG but clearly djokovic will start as the favourites. i so hope fed wins the monte carlo ,2 years since he last won a title on clay

[zep1706]

i think we have to accept now that nadal wont win GS in the same rate he did in the past.he will be 28 in a month(especially with that mileage) ,nadal looks tired but he will give it all in the RG but clearly djokovic will start as the favourites. i so hope fed wins the monte carlo ,2 years since he last won a title on clay

He has admitted that he is lacking confidence (and probably motivation) at the moment. It's rare for a sportsperson to admit that. "I don't have to lie to anybody. After what happened in Australia it was little bit harder for me to find again the intensity, the confidence, the inside power that I always have," "No, the back is in good shape. The physical performance is fine. No problem about that." "Even if I won Rio, I played the final in Miami, it remains something in my mind and in my game," said Nadal. "I'm going to fight to try to find that solution soon." http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/18/us-tennis-men-masters-nadal-idUSBREA3H0H620140418 Personally I think it's an issue of finding motivation after the loss in Australia. He has won these masters so many times that it probably doesn't give him so much motivation. We will see how he does at Roland Garros. That will be a good indication.

[zep1706]

Meanwhile we have an all Swiss final. Stan was brilliant against Ferrer. Djokovic was clearly injured and it was an easy win for Federer. I am really looking forward to this final. I felt Stan had lacked self belief against Fed in the past. He is super confident now, it would be interesting to see how he plays against Fed tomorrow.

[bones]

Well that was a poor decision by Djokovic and his camp. Should never have walked onto court today. Yes it's disappointing for the crowd. But give the crowd their money back, don't go on and play and in the process risk further tournaments possibly slams as well.

[zep1706]

Well that was a poor decision by Djokovic and his camp. Should never have walked onto court today. Yes it's disappointing for the crowd. But give the crowd their money back' date=' don't go on and play and in the process risk further tournaments possibly slams as well.[/quote'] The crowd don't get their money back and even if they did I am sure most of them don't want it back too, it is Monaco FFS. Djokovic played a decent first set. Obviously he thought he still had a chance. After losing that set he knew it was over and hence his intensity level dropped.

[Muloghonto]

Meanwhile we have an all Swiss final. Stan was brilliant against Ferrer. Djokovic was clearly injured and it was an easy win for Federer. I am really looking forward to this final. I felt Stan had lacked self belief against Fed in the past. He is super confident now' date=' it would be interesting to see how he plays against Fed tomorrow.[/quote'] Yes, that is true. Stan can play. Man, can,he play! And tbf, I love players with a stong single handed backhand who r competetive from the baseline. Federer, sampras and becker were the rare few. And even then, federer easily has the best ever s.h.b ever seen. Its not just aesthetics, dominant s.h.b. Lebds itself so much to being a complete player coz is makes it so much easier to be dominant at the net. Stan is so good for tge game that way. But it would b nice to c stan beat his hero. I underdtand why its so challenging for him. Federer was not only his idol, he wa also his employer at obe point. Reverence is hard to overcome sometimes. I hope he does. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

[zep1706]

Yes, that is true. Stan can play. Man, can,he play! And tbf, I love players with a stong single handed backhand who r competetive from the baseline. Federer, sampras and becker were the rare few. And even then, federer easily has the best ever s.h.b ever seen. Its not just aesthetics, dominant s.h.b. Lebds itself so much to being a complete player coz is makes it so much easier to be dominant at the net. Stan is so good for tge game that way. But it would b nice to c stan beat his hero. I underdtand why its so challenging for him. Federer was not only his idol, he wa also his employer at obe point. Reverence is hard to overcome sometimes. I hope he does. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

I don't rate Federer as the best SHB that I have seen. I can think of a number of players who are better, Stan being one of them, Gasquet is another. Even Guga was better. Of course Federer's BH is pretty solid if it doesn't bounce too high, but the rest of his game is so much superior that he can protect his BH quite well unless it's against Nadal. He does slice the best though.

[zep1706]

Just a few games in but Stan looks nervous.

[zep1706]

Federer wins the first set but it hasn't lived up to the level that I had hoped for. Pretty average stuff so far, Stan is erratic.

[Raghav_12]

A good match competition going on between Wawrinka and Federer. Third set Wawrinka leading by 4-0. If he wins, it would be big for Wawrinka.

[zep1706]

The first set was pretty average. The second set was much better but boy after getting the TB did Stan raise his game, absolutely mauled Federer in the third. The guy has some serious power. First masters 1000 for Stan the man!! :two_thumbs_up:

[zep1706]

Monte Carlo to Federer has been what Miami to Nadal, both of them have lost 4 finals in each of these masters. Edit: Just realized Djokovic has also lost 4 finals at Cincinnati.

[Yoda-esque]

Congrats Wawrinka,defeats Federer after 11 consecutive losses to his idol. He has the same beautiful game that Federer has and I hope he carries on and wins a few more slams. While Federer has lost a lot of power in his game, I feel he might just edge one more slam with a favorable draw. Go home and rest Champ!

[Muloghonto]

I don't rate Federer as the best SHB that I have seen. I can think of a number of players who are better' date=' Stan being one of them, Gasquet is another. Even Guga was better. Of course Federer's BH is pretty solid if it doesn't bounce too high, but the rest of his game is so much superior that he can protect his BH quite well unless it's against Nadal. He does slice the best though.[/quote'] At his best, from about 2004 to 2009, Federer's SHB was quite far the best backhand ever. All of the above you name are strong on the SHB. Guga however, did not have as much range, power or variety on his flat backhand, though he did a heavier topspin backhand. Gasquet's is simply too inconsistent to consider. On his best days, his backhand is marginally flatter but he does not have the federer slice. Your backhanded compliment of Federer's backhand indicates how little you appreciate tennis. A high ball on the SHB is the single biggest downfall in tennis, its also the single biggest weakness of the SHB- perhaps its only weakness. Stan I will say has a very good SHB too. One of the best ever but Federer's was better at his peak. Again, its a question of variety, margins and range.

[zep1706]

At his best, from about 2004 to 2009, Federer's SHB was quite far the best backhand ever. All of the above you name are strong on the SHB. Guga however, did not have as much range, power or variety on his flat backhand, though he did a heavier topspin backhand. Gasquet's is simply too inconsistent to consider. On his best days, his backhand is marginally flatter but he does not have the federer slice. Your backhanded compliment of Federer's backhand indicates how little you appreciate tennis. A high ball on the SHB is the single biggest downfall in tennis, its also the single biggest weakness of the SHB- perhaps its only weakness. Stan I will say has a very good SHB too. One of the best ever but Federer's was better at his peak. Again, its a question of variety, margins and range.

That is your opinion. Your opinion is not necessarily the truth. Learn to listen to others too for a change. There are many who don't consider Federer's BH as the best. It is pretty solid, one of the best but it is not the best. His superiority in the other parts of the game protects his relatively weaker BH. Sampras was a similar case although Federer's BH is much better than Sampras'. On the other hand Gasquet is a top 10 player only because of his BH, it is highly consistent. the guy runs around his FH to hit a BH. He has more power and range than Federer has ever had. But if I have to pick one then it would be Stan because of the unmatched power he generates. The only thing Federer does better than Stan and Gasquet from the BH wing is slice. Stan and gasquet are better and much more powerful in pretty much everything else. Roger is also much more error prone than these two, even in his peak. He also doesn't hit up the line often enough. I should have specified that I was talking about Guga on clay, on other surfaces Federer is better. No there was no backhanded compliment from me, stop being judgmental all the time. Not everyone of us is meant to be a Federer fanboy, just accept that. Just because I don't rate his BH as the best I have seen doesn't mean that I don't appreciate tennis. PS: I don't want to continue an argument over this. You consider Federer's BH as the best (hardly a surprise) that's ok with me. I just don't. Let's leave it at that.

[Muloghonto]

That is your opinion. Your opinion is not necessarily the truth. Learn to listen to others too for a change. There are many who don't consider Federer's BH as the best. It is pretty solid, one of the best but it is not the best. His superiority in the other parts of the game protects his relatively weaker BH. Sampras was a similar case although Federer's BH is much better than Sampras'. On the other hand Gasquet is a top 10 player only because of his BH, it is highly consistent. the guy runs around his FH to hit a BH. He has more power and range than Federer has ever had. But if I have to pick one then it would be Stan because of the unmatched power he generates. The only thing Federer does better than Stan and Gasquet from the BH wing is slice. Stan and gasquet are better and much more powerful in pretty much everything else. Roger is also much more error prone than these two, even in his peak. He also doesn't hit up the line often enough. I should have specified that I was talking about Guga on clay, on other surfaces Federer is better. No there was no backhanded compliment from me, stop being judgmental all the time. Not everyone of us is meant to be a Federer fanboy, just accept that. Just because I don't rate his BH as the best I have seen doesn't mean that I don't appreciate tennis. PS: I don't want to continue an argument over this. You consider Federer's BH as the best (hardly a surprise) that's ok with me. I just don't. Let's leave it at that.

Saying the only thing federer does better than stan or gasquet is slice on his BH is like saying the only thing McEnroe does better than any other server is slice. Its a pretty big part of the SHB's arsenal. Particularly in the power era, to possess a SHB slice strong and accurate enough to peg back power-hitters from unleashing an attempted winner is extremely huge in the SHB player's game. Graf did it to perfection too. Federer runs around his backhand because IMO, Federer has the best forehand ever (and on this, there is a fair amount of expert consnsus, i am sure you are aware of) and a forehand is inherently much, much more potent than a SHB. Gasquet does not because Gasquet's forehand is rather ordinary. I disagree that Gasquet has as much power on his SHB drive as Federer in his prime had. But that aspect of his game is influenced by other factors than how good his backhand is compared to others. Stan has unquestionably more power in his backhand than Federer does now and probably did in his prime too but that is not enough. Stan's slice is nowhere in the Federer zone of slice and that makes his backhand less versatile IMO. But you are right on one thing- Stan and Gasquet are more consistent in the long run than Federer in the BH department (marginally so, I've seen Gasquet play hopelessly bad on his BH on his bad days too, much much worse than I've ever seen Federer's bh breakdown) but their lack of a key arsenal- an effective slice, pretty much makes their Backhands less strong in my eyes. Overall, Federer does have the most complete backhand ever. There are probably 5 other players in history who've had more effective backhand slices than Federer and there are probably 5 other players in history who may challenge Federer's SHB in sheer power & range of strokeplay. IMO, no other player can boast that and a little bit less consistency is well worth the extra weapon. On an added front, I'd say Federer is not an ATG top 5-10 bracket in, is in serving. I can think of atleast 5 servers who have more power, accuracy and as much variety as Federer does on serve. His volleying too, is excellent but barely top 5 ever (coz the one trick-shot Federer does not specialize in, is the drop volley. Sampras, Becker, Edberg were all much better at it, thought I can't think of many others who are as good as Federer is on the volley). And he is not the fastest mover I've ever seen ( Nadal at his peak was faster in covering ground, so was Hewitt, Chang and many others). He does have, IMO, the best ever forehand, the best ever SHB and the best footwork in tennis ever. These three things, he is peerless in.

[bones]

One season doesn't make up for an entire career of under-achievement. Wawrinka's BH and FH as powerful as they have been and as potent as they've been the last 18 months, have overall been quite poor. Else he'd have achieved a lot more. I'd take the components from the player who's achieved more. Man this is really starting to worry me, it was pretty bad when Nadal missed 2012 US Open and 2013 AO. But if Novak misses this RG, I think the tournament will suffer. I think most people see him as the main challenge to Nadal and it is the one that still eludes him. The clock is ticking for them all, he's be 27 this year and I can't see him or the others winning slams next year. What a blow if Novak were to miss RG or not be at his fittest.

[Raghav_12]

He has admitted that he is lacking confidence (and probably motivation) at the moment. It's rare for a sportsperson to admit that. "I don't have to lie to anybody. After what happened in Australia it was little bit harder for me to find again the intensity, the confidence, the inside power that I always have," "No, the back is in good shape. The physical performance is fine. No problem about that." "Even if I won Rio, I played the final in Miami, it remains something in my mind and in my game," said Nadal. "I'm going to fight to try to find that solution soon." http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/18/us-tennis-men-masters-nadal-idUSBREA3H0H620140418 Personally I think it's an issue of finding motivation after the loss in Australia. He has won these masters so many times that it probably doesn't give him so much motivation. We will see how he does at Roland Garros. That will be a good indication.

Nadal needs lot of intensity to play and without that he can't pull out his top game. So yeah motivation and confidence are key for him. I was hoping this clay court season would rejuvenate him, but Monte-Carlo didn't give good indication.