AKane Posted February 1 Posted February 1 6 minutes ago, Gollum said: If 6 years is a lot, what is 16 years? You do realize there is a plateau right? What Alcaraz is today at 22 - he can be similar (maybe slower but more cunning and wiser) at 32. However he will decline at 38. I am not sure this Alcaraz beats a Djokovic of age 32 at AO. Heck I am not sure this Alcaraz or that Sinner beat a 30 year old Wawrinka at Aus Open either. See a 25 year old Djokovic in 2012 was similar to a 32 year old Djokovic in 2019, but a 31 year old Federer had declined a lot at age 38 in 2019. Stan AF 1
Gollum Posted February 1 Author Posted February 1 Just now, AKane said: You do realize there is a plateau right? What Alcaraz is today at 22 - he can be similar (maybe slower but more cunning and wiser) at 32. However he will decline at 38. I am not sure this Alcaraz beats a Djokovic of age 32 at AO. Heck I am not sure this Alcaraz or that Sinner beat a 30 year old Wawrinka at Aus Open either. See a 25 year old Djokovic in 2012 was similar to a 32 year old Djokovic in 2019, but a 31 year old Federer had declined a lot at age 38 in 2019. Fed's miss was in 2013-16. Long drought after 2012 Wimbledon win, even the Olympics final next month was a blowout. He was what, 31 in 2013? He should have done better but lost many opportunities against a still vulnerable Djokovic and Nadal. Former had a mental block in slams from 2012-14 and latter became very weak outside clay. Fed's losses in 2014 Wimbledon and USO were very bad...heck in USO that year, Nole got taken out and all Fed had to do was beat Cilic and Nishikori in SF/F. Earlier that year, he lost to Nadal in AO...Nadal had blisters in his hand but won in straights, moronic tactics by Fed that day....Wawrinka was waiting in the final and he was an easy opponent for Fed. 2015 ok, Nadal was out of sorts but Nole had a monster year. I can understand. But 2016 second half? Both Nadal and Nole had major injury issues, free road ahead. And it was Murray and Stan who benefited, not Federer. Even in 2017 USO, Fed hurt his back in a Coldplay concert just before the event, otherwise no one was stopping him. His underachievement was his own doing.
Stan AF Posted February 2 Posted February 2 Tennis declined the day when they slowed courts for longer points and baseline rallies. ravishingravi, Tillu and BacktoCricaddict 3
ravishingravi Posted February 2 Posted February 2 58 minutes ago, Stan AF said: Tennis declined the day when they slowed courts for longer points and baseline rallies. This is so true. Its now more of an endurance sport. Deft and art of closing the angles and taking the volley is over.
Gollum Posted February 2 Author Posted February 2 (edited) 2 hours ago, Stan AF said: Tennis declined the day when they slowed courts for longer points and baseline rallies. Good change I will say, 90s tennis was so boring, just serve and volley, rallies under 5 strokes, very few break points. Rallies made tennis more fun and IQ based, so many magical points from Big 3, Sincaraz etc. Btw slowing of courts started around 2002-03, and also carpet got banned due to injury concerns (Federer was at the forefront asking for its removal). There should be more diversity in court speeds, I agree. But whatever we have today is way better from entertainment pov. Edited February 2 by Gollum
Gollum Posted February 2 Author Posted February 2 In terms of viewership also, tennis is in a far healthier state than it has ever been in the past. Post 2003 has been the golden era for the sport. Recently saw a news article that Italian tennis federation revenue has surpassed their football federation revenue. So whatever they are doing is working. Tennis beats football: Italian Tennis Federation surpasses €230 million and surpasses the Italian Football Federation
AKane Posted February 2 Posted February 2 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Gollum said: 2 hours ago, Stan AF said: Tennis declined the day when they slowed courts for longer points and baseline rallies. Good change I will say, 90s tennis was so boring, just serve and volley, rallies under 5 strokes, very few break points. It was not just the courts slowing down.... it was also the rackets/strings changing. The newer lighter rackets with the newer strings means the person at the net is a sitting duck. The baseliner can take mighty swings with the lighter racket and put incredible spin on the ball as well with the new strings. If the person at the baseline today can get a second chance at pass - they got those in the past too - with the newer rackets it is advantage baseliner. In the past it was still advantage volleyer. Edited February 2 by AKane Gollum 1
Gollum Posted February 2 Author Posted February 2 12 minutes ago, AKane said: It was not just the courts slowing down.... it was also the rackets/strings changing. The newer lighter rackets with the newer strings means the person at the net is a sitting duck. The baseliner can take mighty swings with the lighter racket and put incredible spin on the ball as well with the new strings. If the person at the baseline today can get a second chance at pass - they got those in the past too - with the newer rackets it is advantage baseliner. In the past it was still advantage volleyer. Agree. Nadal used to have 3000+ rpm topspin. Sport has changed a lot. That is why cross-era comparisons are tricky.
BacktoCricaddict Posted February 2 Posted February 2 13 hours ago, Stan AF said: Tennis declined the day when they slowed courts for longer points and baseline rallies. What John McEnroe played was the tennis I loved to watch. And Leander Paes exemplified that, too.
Recommended Posts