Game Styles

[tennis_chiro]

Have a little respect!

Equipment...
... It's a more and more, athletically ruthless equation. Look at the old tapes. Any honest observer will see any of the top 100 guys would beat the top 10 from the old days. ...
Tennis has evolved a great deal more than 8% in that time, and it's more like a factor of 100% or more.

Don't overly discount the true character of those great champions of the past. No doubt the game has more players who can win a match than ever before. Someone in the top 50 thirty or certainly forty years ago probably wouldn't fare very well in the competitive maelstrom of today's top tennis players. But anyone who was a top ten player, even 40 or 50 years ago would find a way to excel in even today's tough competitive environment. Certainly, if you dropped them in from a time capsule, they would be overwhelmed. But give them a chance to learn to use the equipment and learn a little of the technique and their biggest and most important muscle would help them find a way to succeed and even excel. That muscle is, of course, the one between their ears. You can play the who beat who game through the ages and know that Budge, Kramer, Gonzales, Riggs, Hoad, Laver, Rosewall, Emerson, Borg, Connors, etc. would have found a way to succeed.

In the end, for me, there is one thing that sets Nadal off from all the rest. Indeed, he is certainly a physical beast and the topspin is awesome. The relentless drive is breathtaking. The willingness to work and keep improving every year is admirable and endearing. It's wonderful to see his growth in creativity, but there is one thing, for me, that sets him off. When his opponent is in a position to hit a routine winner that is virtually impossible to return, despite the reality of the situation, Rafa still believes he can win the point. NO, MORE THAN THAT, he believes he will win the point; in fact, he thinks he is still SUPPOSED TO win the point. Of course, he is not always right. In fact, he is usually wrong in those dire situations, but that doesn't shake his belief one bit. You would think that it could almost be counterproductive. Then you hear his interview about letting the second set get away against Murray and refocusing for the third set. I don't think he lost any of that raw animalistic belief, but he was able to reign it in because he knew he had to be ready for a supreme effort in the third set. (Unfortunately, Murray checked out early when he got spooked by the pain in his elbow coming back as the cortisone shot wore off. That would have been a great third set.) I'm not sure he would have been that smart a year or two ago. It's going to take an absolutely supreme effort possible by only 3 or 4 guys in the game on their very best day to challenge a healthy Rafa in 5 sets at one of the majors.

Federer used to have that kind of belief, maybe not about individual points so much, but about any match; plus he had the thought planted in his opponents heads; not anymore. And maybe Nole is developing that kind of confidence, but he doesn't have that wellspring of confidence from coming back in so many tough matches. Beating Nadal at Indian Wells and Miami really helped. It will be interesting to see how the season plays out.

But all of those great players of past eras, even with what appears to be less athleticism in the old clips we look at, had, at least to some extent, developed that muscle between their ears. Certainly, there were streaks that were anomalies, but anyone who stayed in the top 5 for two or three years would have learned how to compete with today's players. Can you imagine, Gonzales after 4 or 5 years in today's competitive environment with today's equipment and training opportunities at age 24 going up against Nadal. I think Gonzales is the one I would most like to see trying to build a rivalry with Nadal in my fantasy world. Oh well, there are many things we can never have…but don't discount the great heart and competitive fire that enabled those great champions of the past to do what they did. How do you think Nadal would have done if he had been brought up in the 50's with 14 1/2 ounce, 4 5/8 inch gripped wood rackets. …Yeah, I think he would have done just fine, maybe not as well as Federer, but just fine.

Who would you take, Phil?

don

[GeoffWilliams]

Grunting, gloating, dancing, fist pumping psyches of all types have replaced the zen like motto of the old days, "Behave the same whether losing or winning."

It's a blue collar battle to the death out there, a penance to find form and kill your opponent before he kills you. It's the same all over the universe, kill and eat, or be killed and eaten.

Look at the old tapes. Any honest observer will see any of the top 100 guys would beat the top 10 from the old days.-geoffwilliams

Have you ever tried racquetball? I think you left out steroids, betting, endorsements and money (the root of all evil) in your list of modern attributes. Some souls are not to be reasoned with.

I have seen your backhand overhead...no style, no sense of artistic flair, no real understanding...whatsoever. Could it be that a man's strokes are a reflection of what is inside of him? Certainly his written words, or what comes out of his mouth, are. Talk about evolution...and tennis...and trash talking.

I put two back hand overheads over the fences in my last two league doubles matches. I'll bet you have never done that, nor ever seen it done by anyone in person. Anyone studying the video of old 73 matches, can see, that they hit softer, with less spin, less speed, less accuracy, serve and return games are way below modern standards, they move slower, with less power, recover slower, don't use their legs as much, have worse technique, and would be beaten easily by anyone in the top 100. Fifty years from now, it will be the same story. Unless, you are in denial.

Do you know why no one is arguing that Owens would have beaten the current sprinter? The clock says otherwise. Fifty years from now, the time will be down to 9.39 for 100 meters, not the 10.49 for yards by Owens. In tennis, it's even worse, yet, the guys with their heads in the sand never stop saying the old guys would be even with the current top pros. It's just pathetically unreasonable! (And always made by the older guys, not the younger guys.) If they had the same equipment and if they had the same access to training and if, etc. Look at the video tapes, and they are proof enough. Serves are about 100-110 max. Groundies are way slow, with no action. Lots of net attacking and sad attempts at passes. EVen the women hit harder now, serve harder, with more action and power. The tapes prove that.

Flexible? I never saw any old player do the splits like all the top guys do now. Mentally flexible? It's like saying a good 6.0 player can beat a 7.0, with good strategy. Bs lies by bs older guys. I'm an older guy myself, and saw many of the old timers in person, such as Vitas, Gonzalez, Maria Bueno, Mac, Borg, Woodford, etc., and I am not in denial. I've worked hard to learn the modern game, and it's not been easy, to drop the old style of cont. grips on both fh/bh, and net attack game, wiper fh/western grips, legs used to throw myself into the shots, and it's cost me victories, trying to learn to add stick speed. I see the writing on the wall, and the new style, always upcoming, adds to the game, and does not detract from it! Who cares if it's harder to attack the net? It makes for longer rallies, and higher tv ratings.

The butt pick kid, has added to the game, not detracted from it. (And I am a serve/volleyer.)

[johnyandell]

Guys,

Let's both back off please. Let's keep this to disagreements over tennis ok?

John Yandell

[don_budge]

My Apologies...

JohnY...

My humble apologies to you and the subscribers of Tennisplayer for anything I may of written to offend anyone. Sorry Geoff.

[johnyandell]

No biggie. We went down this road a long ugly way in the past--myself included--just trying to improve...Don't let this stop you from contributing please!

[GeoffWilliams]

I took offense at the insult of my signature shot, my use of words, etc., reflecting who I am as a person, etc., in so far as it was insulting. Those comments made by him have nothing to do with tennis. My comments are intended to entertain, add some flair, flow into a line of reasoning. I made no insulting retaliatory comments at all, nor would I in the future.

[stotty]

Amazing the emotions the today's v yesterday's players arguments evoke.

There is no such thing as generations really, just a never ending cycle of tennis matches that have been going on for years. Careers of great players overlap/intersect, something I've wrote about it many times on the TP forum.

Pancho Gonzales beat Connors. Connors beat McEnroe. McEnroe beat Becker. Becker beat Agassi. Agassi beat Sampras. Sampras had a 5 set match with Federer....need I say more.

No one has ever come up with an argument to refute my claim, and unless someone can i'm sticking by it. Facts can't be refuted.

The players haven't changed that much, equipment has though. Are players today better, probably. But unless we give all the contestants wooden rackets to play with in this years grand slam events, we'll never to be able to make a realistic comparison to really know.

[worldsbestcoach]

?

Someone asked me about Nadal's forehand. I looked at that video. I watch Rafa is slow motion practically every day. He has a great forehand, but he also makes embarrassing mistakes on his forehand from time to time that reveal flaws in even his great forehand.

Players today are pulled in different directions. They are taught the technique that Berdych uses, but they sometimes unconsciously modify that technique, because they unconsciously realize that what they were taught does not really work all that well. Even the great Rafa is sometimes pulled in different directions, concerning his forehand.

Also, go back and watch footage of some championship matches in the early 1970's and you will see that players of yesteryear were far superior to today's pros in reaching balls, in anticipation, and in proper court positioning. One of my posts has already addressed this matter. Also, no one has improved upon Connors' 2-fisted backhand. Today's pros generally have good 2-fisters, also, as long as they do not jerk the racket so fast over their shoulder that the ball goes in the bottom of the net, which it too often does with today's pros.

Also, part of growth in tennis is improvement in technique. If a player has poor technique with a wood racket, as so many previous players did, then that technique is poor with modern rackets . .and vice versa.

[stotty]

Someone asked me about Nadal's forehand. I looked at that video. I watch Rafa is slow motion practically every day. He has a great forehand, but he also makes embarrassing mistakes on his forehand from time to time that reveal flaws in even his great forehand.

What mistakes are these? I find it hard to see any