He always looks too... Short to me for tennis.
Tennis 2019
- Thread starter Brophs
- Start date
Do something, Putin!
Lots of fun on the women's side right now. Any one of four players could wind up #1 depending on what happens in the next week.
https://video.eurosport.de/tennis/a...ichterentscheidung-aus_vid1155795/video.shtml
linesman shouted out, despite being (clearly) on the line. Nishikori was in a winning position and put it away. PCB challenged it, but the ref didn't replay it. According to the rules, the point has to be replayed, despite Nishikori making this point 9999/10000 times otherwise. The refs fecked up badly.
Didn’t know that the AO has changed to a 5th set tie break
Flying start for Nadal - 3 up against Tiafoe and won his service games to love. Tiafoe next to serve.
Cheers, yeah does seem like a technical error from the umpire, thought the call came pretty much as Kei struck the ball though, so didn't change things much.
As expected, comfortable for Rafa. Expect it to be similar for Novak tomorrow too.
Nadal - Tstisipas has the potential to be a good match, though they played twice last year (1 clay, 1 hard court) matches which Nadal won both comfortably in straight sets.
Probably fancy in Raonic against Pouille, but no result would surpruse me in that.
Nadal - Tstisipas has the potential to be a good match, though they played twice last year (1 clay, 1 hard court) matches which Nadal won both comfortably in straight sets.
Probably fancy in Raonic against Pouille, but no result would surpruse me in that.
Bah, looks like it'll be Nadal 18 or Djokovic 15 at the end of the AO.
Erm.. so..go Novak?!
Think this will be Federer's last year. He hasn't made a GS final since last year's AO now.
Erm.. so..go Novak?!
Think this will be Federer's last year. He hasn't made a GS final since last year's AO now.
Same here, don't want Nadal to overtake Federer so anyone but him, really. I don't mind Tsitsipas either.
As for the women, I'd like to see Osaka win it.
Would love a new winner like Tsitsipas as tennis needs a new face. The next generation has forever looked hopelessly forgettable. I fear the game is going to take a big hit post the big 3. A couple of 'wonderkids' making it and winning GS' would be cool.
Wonder if it would be so cool if they were facing Federer in the final, eh?
Anyway I don't see Nadal beating Djoko in the final if they both make it but if he does, it'll be massive. Closes in to two behind Fed, first person to hold 2 of each Slam and then RG to follow
If and its a huge IF, Rafa manages to win AO and then RG, given his superior H2H with Federer and being the only one to hold 2 of each Slam, GOAT discussions would begin to get a bit interesting.
I think if Novak wins, he's got a great chance of finishing very very close to Federer.
No way Federer finishes a year before the Olympics. He may not be a realistic shot of winning 2020, but he'll want to be there.
Nadal has a good chance against Novak. Thought he was unlucky against him at Wimbledon. Firstly with the roof being closed on the second day when it was hot which was ridiculous but he had a lot of chances to break him.
His serving looks to have improved. That’s what has let him down previously against Djokovic. If he can get free points on it then he has a good chance.
His serving looks to have improved. That’s what has let him down previously against Djokovic. If he can get free points on it then he has a good chance.
This is a bit worrying.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Didn't watch the match, but any signs for concern in how he played?
I think Tsitsipas’s run will end against Nadal, quite similar to Fed beating defending champion Pete Sampras before losing to Henman in 2001.
Nadal should have the edge this time vs Djokovic. Heavier condition on Sunday evening and Djokovic has dropped sets here and there.
Be there for what? If he isn’t challenging or looking close to challenging then he will call it a day rather than waiting 15 months for a event he has no chance of winning. If he loses to Djokovic or Nadal then he’d probably carry on. But if he loses to more guys like Tsitipas then I don’t see him waiting for Olympics.
He could finish up at Geneva this year with the Laver cup.
How is that similar? Nadals a previous champion and multi grand slam winner. Henman was just a poor mans Pete Sampras, who failed at grand slams. Tsitipas has just played his Henman today. Now he’s gotta face another Sampras and possibly another one in the final. If he beats those three in one tournament then it will be one of the most impressive things I seen in tennis.
Similarity stops at beating the defending champion then going out, he’s roughly the same age as Fed when the latter did it too.
One trick pony who won 2/3 of his Grand Slams in FO.Wonder if it would be so cool if they were facing Federer in the final, eh?
Anyway I don't see Nadal beating Djoko in the final if they both make it but if he does, it'll be massive. Closes in to two behind Fed, first person to hold 2 of each Slam and then RG to follow
If and its a huge IF, Rafa manages to win AO and then RG, given his superior H2H with Federer and being the only one to hold 2 of each Slam, GOAT discussions would begin to get a bit interesting.
Djokovic on the other hand...if he reaches Federer in GS, then there is very hard to find counter-arguments why he isn't the GOAT.
So not a one trick pony then
65% trick pony.
The GOAT question is really more about who is 2nd at this time since Djokovic is just as close to Nadal as Nadal is to Fed. If Novak wins this one then he will only be two short of Nadal, with the prospects that he will likely win one more either at Wimby or the US later this year.
How is he a one trick pony?
French open is the most difficult slam to win and Clay is the toughest surface for tennis players because you can’t just go out there thinking you going to out power players off the surface. You have to think a lot about how you going to create points.
Nadal went to grass and beat Fed. Not his fault Fed couldn’t do it on clay. Even Djokovic couldn’t do it when Nadal was actually playing well. I’m not counting 2015 because that was some imposter posing as Nadal and the only clay titles he won were events in that he rarely played in. One was even after the French open that’s how bad things were for him back then.
I understand he’s not the GOAT to you. But calling him a one trick pony is just ridiculous. Agassi won 8 slams. 6 were on one surface, so one trick pony to your logic. Sampras won 14, 7 were on one surface so another one trick pony.
I don’t know how anybody could call Rafa that. He’s still won 6 slams on other surfaces and reached multiple finals. Not like he sits there every year just waiting for clay season.
Also people just undervalue the fact he’s won 11 slams from one event. To me it’s one of the best achievements in sports. How he comes back year after year winning it. Everyone wants to be the man to beat him yet he keeps prevailing year after year. He’s lost like two matches at the French. That’s just crazy. Federer was dominant at Wimbledon. But Nadal at the French is a different level. Nobody ever will have that sort of dominance on one slam ever again. If they do then they need to start winning it at 18 years old.
Referring to current active players. Ignoring stats, just based on your opinion.
Best serve:
Best forehand:
Best backhand:
Best volleyer:
Best footwork:
Best serve: Kyrios
Best forehand:Nadal
Best backhand (One handed):Federer (Wawrinka very close 2nd)
Best backhand (Double handed): Djokovic
Best volleyer:Federer
Best footwork:Murray
Sadly, I don't watch women's tennis enough anymore. Loved Henin when I was a child so I'd be more familiar with her generation. I'm a sucker for a delicious one handed backhand.
Best serve:
Best forehand:
Best backhand:
Best volleyer:
Best footwork:
Best serve: Kyrios
Best forehand:Nadal
Best backhand (One handed):Federer (Wawrinka very close 2nd)
Best backhand (Double handed): Djokovic
Best volleyer:Federer
Best footwork:Murray
Sadly, I don't watch women's tennis enough anymore. Loved Henin when I was a child so I'd be more familiar with her generation. I'm a sucker for a delicious one handed backhand.
Last edited:
Oops, touched a nerve there.
Obviously, I wasn't entirely serious. At the same time, I don't think that (as of now) he can be considered the GOAT (I have him third/fourth), simply by the fact that he hasn't won too much (compared for example with Fed) outside of FO. I said before, he is the greatest player ever in a Grand Slam, but to be considered the GOAT you need to do extremely well outside of your favorite surface. Federer has won 12 GO outside of his favorite, Nadal has won only 6. You can be unbeatable in 1/4 of GS, but how can you be considered as the GOAT if you are nowhere as good as others (I mean the likes of Djoker and Fed) outside of it.
Disappointed in you. I defended you when Eboue and Silva were bullying you over Paul Allen. And here you are touching my nerves.
Anyway you could argue Federer was nowhere near good enough to beat Nadal at the French. Only way he won it was because Soderling did him a big favour. He owes him that French open because if he had met Nadal with one knee he probably still would have struggled.
That’s another thing. Nadal towards the end of 2008 was the best player. He won the French and Wimbledon. Then started off 2009 by winning the Australian. Then ends up getting injured at the French and missing his Wimbledon defence due to injury for a few months. Djokovic and Fed have been more lucky with injuries.
You saw what happened to Djokovic last year when he came back from elbow surgery. He was losing to all sorts of players.
Djokovic has missed one slam in his whole career. Nadal has missed 6 and withdraw from the French in 2016. Feds missed two in 2016, I’m not counting his recent French opens because he could have played them unlike in 2016.
Then you had moments like against Wawrinka in 2014 Aussie final, where he got injured in the warm up. He was going to call it quits in the second set. He did take the third set, but that was more due to Wawrinka not knowing what the feck to do. He got injured in the fourth set vs Cilic last year in the semi final and had to retire for the first time in his career. Then again against Del Potro he had to retire in the semi finals of a slam. He had beaten Del Po like 6 times in a row before that and about three of them were in slams. So he’s been unlucky with injuries also.
You could say his playing style means he is going to pick up more injuries. But Djokovic probably runs equally the same or more and plays the same amount of events yet rarely got injured. Nadal is just prone to picking up more injuries and it’s cost him at vital times in his career to get more slams.
I don't disagree much with the individual points here. I disagree with the general picture though. GOAT for me means the 'greatest ever player', not 'much better than the other two in one tournament, but worse than them in other tournaments'. Well, at least vs Fed for now, Djokovic likely will win a lot more before he is done.
French Open is only as "difficult" to win as it was for those specialists to win at the others previously.....thus why Borg's achievements will always stand the test of time. To casually rock up and do the French-Wimbledon so effortlessly at times.....shame he couldn't just get that US, shame he didn't rock up at the Aussie in a time when no one actually cared about it, shame he retired so early despite still having it.
In a 8 year career he won 11 from only 3 Slams, since no one cared about the Aussie Open until years later. Roger has 20 in a 20 year career when he was playing at 4 every year, it'll be similar for Rafa and Novak. Don't write off Borg.
Also being an all-court player is easier than ever.
In a 8 year career he won 11 from only 3 Slams, since no one cared about the Aussie Open until years later. Roger has 20 in a 20 year career when he was playing at 4 every year, it'll be similar for Rafa and Novak. Don't write off Borg.
Also being an all-court player is easier than ever.
Eh it has nothing to do with specialists.
It’s more to do with you can’t just rely on your serve or power game to win points at the French or clay in general because the courts are a lot slower.
So every game you are involved in there are long rallies. Doing it for two weeks and 7 games in a row is a lot tougher. Where as in Wimbledon if you have a good serve and forehand like Roddick or Raonic then that will be at times be good enough to get you in a final. The points are less demanding on the body. If Isner and Anderson played for how many hours they did in the semi final at Wimbledon last year on clay then their careers would be over.
But you need more than a serve in the French open. You need a strong baseline and return game.
To be fair Federer has been playing for 20 years. But he won the majority of his slams in the first 10 years of his career.
From 1999-2009 he won 15 slams. Bjorg may have won more or he may have not. His motivation went unlike Federer after losing a final.
Also factor in that one of the other reasons he quit was due to tournament organisers enforcing rules that they must play 10 tournaments a year. Federer played a lot more tournaments per year and in his era it’s been more baseline rather than serve and volley. So points are longer than when Bjorg played, so more demanding on the body.
So for me Bjorg doesn’t overtake the big three. They had limited schedules back then. Probably 6 or 7 tournaments at max. The master series actually count for me. The big three again are the most successful in them. The style of play now is a lot more gruelling then it was back then. They all been successful in their 30s and world number 1s.
The only thing I’d give to Bjorg is the racquets were shite back then compared to now.
I'm wondering how the discussion would go if all retired after winning 20 GS.
Last edited:
If Nadal wins this tournament then that really helps his bid for GOAT. Being the only one of the three to win all grand slams twice.
It's a weird discussion actually.
Djokovic has played tennis at a higher level than anyone else has ever managed. Only one to have held all 4 grand slams at the same time. Dominated both Nadal and Federer at times.
Federer dominated for a longer period than anyone else, and his body of work is more impressive. He's also the most iconic tennis player of all time, and he's probably added more the sport than anyone else.
Nadal is the best single surface player of all time. He's also probably the biggest competitor of all time, because of the limits he pushed both Djokovic & Federer to on their favourite surfaces while neither could do the same to him (apart from maybe Djokovic in 2013).
Would be funny if Nadal overtook Federer's record. This one plus two more French opens. And then fluke one more of the rest of the three before he's too old.
Djokovic had the highest absolute peak, and positive record with the other two. If he reaches 20, he likely would have surpassed Federer as the person being in No. 1 ATP list. Extremely hard to argue against him if he reaches 20. The only arguments for Fed would be his visual appeal (as in, being more enjoyable to watch) and number of semis/quarters (but then doesn't Djokovic has more ATP Masters), but they are a bit weak arguments. If Djoker wins 20, he will be the GOAT.
Nadal, it depends. If he wins the last 3 outside of FO, he might have an argument. 9 GS outside of his favorite one would be better than only 6 there and 14 in FO.
I don’t buy this Federer being more enjoyable to watch. Maybe 10 years ago. Probably because Federer has a better serve than the other two, so his service games can be over in a minute with nothing happening. Where as Djokovic and Nadal need to work a lot harder to hold their serve so it makes for more interesting rallies.
I found Nadal and Djokovic matches even when they not playing each other more entertaining. Djokovic has been involved in many classics.
Just watched S Williams v Pliskova. Crazy stuff with Williams up 5-1 in the 3rd and loses 7-5.
Pliskova v Osaka tomorrow in the semi final.
Pliskova v Osaka tomorrow in the semi final.
Serena
Edit: Reading Serena twisted her ankle. Losing from 5-1 not funny then.
Edit: Reading Serena twisted her ankle. Losing from 5-1 not funny then.