Winning in the locker room

[rosooki]

I was wondering if the esteemed members of this site have any anedotes/stories or strategies for how to go about doing it. Or for that matter, what it means...i.e Nadal wins most of his matches in the locker room.

[airforce1]

Not sure where that comes from, but I don't get it really.

Rafa drags people all over the court till they miss, and makes them think they must hit much better to win.
Oh, and he pounds the heck out of the ball all the while and rarely misses his aggressive shots.

Everything else is just window dressing.

[rosooki]

Re locker room

Well, that particular quote was from an announcer during the most recent Rotterdam match with Dimitrov, but it has been said before about him and others.

I don't know what is meant by it, exactly.

[llll]

what is meant is his opponent already doesnt beleive he can win before they take the court. while still in the locker room. fed had it but now he doesnt

[CraigC]

More an edge than an outright win.

Every player has a reputation and sometimes that reputation causes others to do things that might not be normal. For example, when playing Rafa, players know they must hit closer to the lines, or with more power than normal. Or perhaps they will try to come in more against him. In Rafa's case, many players have to play "reactive tennis." This means they look across the net and worry about beating that specific player, rather than "active tennis" or playing their own game.
Sampras had that same intimidation factor. He walked on the court and said I'm going to throw my game at you, and you deal with it. Everyone knew Pete would raise up his game at critical junctures in the match, and many players came out of their comfort zone trying to keep up.
As a result, both Rafa and Pete forced their opponents to create game plans that were beyond their means, and when a player has to do more than he is capable of, he most often loses.
As for Fed, I think he had that aura of invincibility for a very long time. He won matches in the locker room because players simply knew they didn't have his fluid movement and incredible skill set. They went out to the court knowing they'd have to be perfect, and in trying to do so, they committed more errors.
Today, its obvious Rafa is no longer intimidated by Federer, and though he must play incredible tennis to win, Roger also feels forced to do more. It makes for some phenomenal matches when we get to watch two giants attempting to go beyond their limits.
To win in the locker room, a player must create a feeling of dominance over another player. Once that is done, the match is half over.
Hope that helps explain the phrase a bit.
CC

[airforce1]

Every player has a reputation and sometimes that reputation causes others to do things that might not be normal. For example, when playing Rafa, players know they must hit closer to the lines, or with more power than normal. Or perhaps they will try to come in more against him. In Rafa's case, many players have to play "reactive tennis." This means they look across the net and worry about beating that specific player, rather than "active tennis" or playing their own game.
Sampras had that same intimidation factor. He walked on the court and said I'm going to throw my game at you, and you deal with it. Everyone knew Pete would raise up his game at critical junctures in the match, and many players came out of their comfort zone trying to keep up.
As a result, both Rafa and Pete forced their opponents to create game plans that were beyond their means, and when a player has to do more than he is capable of, he most often loses.
As for Fed, I think he had that aura of invincibility for a very long time. He won matches in the locker room because players simply knew they didn't have his fluid movement and incredible skill set. They went out to the court knowing they'd have to be perfect, and in trying to do so, they committed more errors.
Today, its obvious Rafa is no longer intimidated by Federer, and though he must play incredible tennis to win, Roger also feels forced to do more. It makes for some phenomenal matches when we get to watch two giants attempting to go beyond their limits.
To win in the locker room, a player must create a feeling of dominance over another player. Once that is done, the match is half over.
Hope that helps explain the phrase a bit.
CC

excellent post

[johnyandell]

True that.