Thoughts about Tennis Tradition...

[bottle]

Looking out from my window...it is night now. The full moon is directly in line with the tallest tree in the landscape. The very top of the 25 meter tall pine is lit by the moon. Only the top two meters of the tree are silohetted against the darkness by the moonbeam. Like a sign. An Easter sign...a gift. Thank you. I am very fortunate.

Is it like Eliza and George and their baby making it across Lake Erie from Sandusky, Ohio to Amherstberg, Ontario? Which is like Uncle Tom escaping Simon Legree and making it to heaven?

[don_budge]

Once In A Blue Moon...

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/...ad-easter.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmactMIhrRM

[don_budge]

In that case, well spotted, old boy. I should have known. You have a mind like a bear trap.

You have to listen to people like Fred. He was a vintage player who witnessed the classic era and the start of the modern era. He understood the wooden racket like only a vintage player can. You can see Fred's racket and the strings he played with in the Wimbledon museum. The modern player would be mortified at the thought of playing with such an antique. I would love to give the finalists of this year's US Open one of Fred's rackets each to play the final with. That would be fun to watch.

That's right...you must listen to people like Fred. He is iconic and a great success story. Listening to the interview that seems to serve as a basis to the article is an eye opener as to how the tennis society in his day operated. He wasn't of the social class that had inroads into the game. I know that feeling from when I started to participate in 1968...it was coincidentally the same year the game went open.

Don Budge used to talk to me about the conditions that they played in. He seemed to be less than happy in 1972 that he missed out on the big money. The big money in 1972 not being what it is today.

Elders like Fred Perry and Don Budge you can hang on every word. Most likely they aren't out to fool anyone.

Thanks for your participation on this thread. Your stuff is always appreciated.

[bottle]

Amen. Great find with the interview. Listening to the elders gives perspective.

So why don't you do it?

[don_budge]

You have to listen to people like Fred. He was a vintage player who witnessed the classic era and the start of the modern era. He understood the wooden racket like only a vintage player can. You can see Fred's racket and the strings he played with in the Wimbledon museum. The modern player would be mortified at the thought of playing with such an antique. I would love to give the finalists of this year's US Open one of Fred's rackets each to play the final with. That would be fun to watch.

Amen. Great find with the interview. Listening to the elders gives perspective.

[stotty]

No...it was an error from the article itself. I posted the article in post #378. I thought it was a pretty good catch...and I still do. The Kinsey brothers played in the 1920's. I was aware of them because of my familiarity of Tilden. He discussed them in his book "Match Play and the Spin of the Ball" written in 1925. The Kinseys won the National Doubles Championship in 1924.

In that case, well spotted, old boy. I should have known. You have a mind like a bear trap.

You have to listen to people like Fred. He was a vintage player who witnessed the classic era and the start of the modern era. He understood the wooden racket like only a vintage player can. You can see Fred's racket and the strings he played with in the Wimbledon museum. The modern player would be mortified at the thought of playing with such an antique. I would love to give the finalists of this year's US Open one of Fred's rackets each to play the final with. That would be fun to watch.

[bottle]

No...it was an error from the article itself. I posted the article in post #378. I thought it was a pretty good catch...and I still do. The Kinsey brothers played in the 1920's. I was aware of them because of my familiarity of Tilden. He discussed them in his book "Match Play and the Spin of the Ball" written in 1925. The Kinsey's won the National Doubles Championship in 1924.

Kinseys. You don't need the apostrophe.

[stotty]

don_budge...Just Another Student of the Game

Interesting that I caught an error in the article. It should read the "Kinsey brothers" and not the "Tinsey brothers".

It may not have been an error. I cut and pasted the article and for some reason, when I saved the post, it generated double apostrophes and joined words together, etc. I had to unpick all the scramble so the article became readable.

Oddly enough, I watched of the men's closed county championships final just recently. One of the finalists had an accomplished skill set. He could volley quite and had good hands and feel. He was intelligent the way he went about his match play too. The irony was he lost. He lost to a far more brainless player who just had so much power. And that's my point and why I posted Fred's interview. A player can be as thick as two short planks yet win by virtue of brute force. This is where the game went pear shaped.

I watched the replay of Shapovalov v Tsonga the other day. I think the key thing in that match - as you said yourself in a post about Shapovalov - is his ability to wait and be patient. He doesn't pull the trigger too early. He reached a whole new level in that match. He looks a really difficult customer to play against. I hope he progresses well and goes deep into the tournament.

[don_budge]

don_budge...Just Another Student of the Game

Interesting that I caught an error in the article. It should read the "Kinsey brothers" and not the "Tinsey brothers".

[don_budge]

From the Horse's Mouth...Fred Perry

Video of interview...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96l7psRZVGY

The article...

https://www.tennis-prose.com/article...tennis-part-2/

[don_budge]

An Interview with Fred Perry, aged 85, in 1994...

“Look. This game is not complicated. If there is no footwork, there is no tennis. If you’re not secure in your footwork, you’re in trouble.”

“I played over 300 matches with (Bill Tilden).”

“To me… when you talk about the best player I ever saw …I say Bill Tilden. These professional boys today do not realize how much they owe to Tilden. He WAS tennis. He won this tournament (Wimbledon) three times. He only played here four times. The first professional, about 1928, was Suzanne Lenglen, the French girl, who got $25,000. They toured in the U.S. with Murray K. Brown, Vincent Richards, who had won the Olympics in Paris in 1924, and the Tinsey Brothers. The first year they made money. The second year they broke even and the promoter said, That’'s it. It was 1929 and the stock market crashed. The next year Tilden turned pro anyway after winning Wimbledon, and he really started the pro circuit as it is known today.”

Outstanding feature of Tilden’s game?

“His head. When you played Tilden, you had to think,” said Perry without hesitation. “I learned a great deal from him. See, when you played Bill, you never got anything you wanted. If you wanted it low, he gave it to you high. If you wanted it wide, he gave it to you close. If you wanted it fast he gave it to you slow. If you wanted to talk, he shut up. If you wanted to play silently, he talked. You were always thinking, and you had to think against Tilden.”

Thoughts on modern tennis?

“Today’s game, because of the equipment which limits them to certain things, is lacking a bit of thought. They use the technology to the absolute utmost for their own game, which is wonderful in its way. They play extremely well. But there are certain things they just cannot do any more with this equipment. We could never play like they do with our equipment, but they can’t play like we did with our equipment because we had to work for the opening much more. They can force it. Now when you force something and you make mistakes, you fall over. We never used to fall over. We never knew where the ball was going to come back; we knew where it wasn’t going to come back. See, we had the fellow on the run by the time he moved in. It’'s a different ballgame completely. The tournament tennis played today is show business. You’'re advertising this, you’'re advertising that. At the age of 20 you have a manager, you’ve got a lawyer, you’ve got a coach and a trainer, you’ve got a mother, you’ve got a father, a girlfriend. It’s an absolute business. They are extremely lucky today. And basically they owe it all to Bill Tilden.”

Beauty!!! The book is William Tilden II. Period.

[stotty]

An Interview with Fred Perry, aged 85, in 1994...

“Look. This game is not complicated. If there is no footwork, there is no tennis. If you’re not secure in your footwork, you’re in trouble.”

“I played over 300 matches with (Bill Tilden).”

“To me… when you talk about the best player I ever saw …I say Bill Tilden. These professional boys today do not realize how much they owe to Tilden. He WAS tennis. He won this tournament (Wimbledon) three times. He only played here four times. The first professional, about 1928, was Suzanne Lenglen, the French girl, who got $25,000. They toured in the U.S. with Murray K. Brown, Vincent Richards, who had won the Olympics in Paris in 1924, and the Tinsey Brothers. The first year they made money. The second year they broke even and the promoter said, That’'s it. It was 1929 and the stock market crashed. The next year Tilden turned pro anyway after winning Wimbledon, and he really started the pro circuit as it is known today.”

Outstanding feature of Tilden’s game?

“His head. When you played Tilden, you had to think,” said Perry without hesitation. “I learned a great deal from him. See, when you played Bill, you never got anything you wanted. If you wanted it low, he gave it to you high. If you wanted it wide, he gave it to you close. If you wanted it fast he gave it to you slow. If you wanted to talk, he shut up. If you wanted to play silently, he talked. You were always thinking, and you had to think against Tilden.”

Thoughts on modern tennis?

“Today’s game, because of the equipment which limits them to certain things, is lacking a bit of thought. They use the technology to the absolute utmost for their own game, which is wonderful in its way. They play extremely well. But there are certain things they just cannot do any more with this equipment. We could never play like they do with our equipment, but they can’t play like we did with our equipment because we had to work for the opening much more. They can force it. Now when you force something and you make mistakes, you fall over. We never used to fall over. We never knew where the ball was going to come back; we knew where it wasn’t going to come back. See, we had the fellow on the run by the time he moved in. It’'s a different ballgame completely. The tournament tennis played today is show business. You’'re advertising this, you’'re advertising that. At the age of 20 you have a manager, you’ve got a lawyer, you’ve got a coach and a trainer, you’ve got a mother, you’ve got a father, a girlfriend. It’s an absolute business. They are extremely lucky today. And basically they owe it all to Bill Tilden.”

[hockeyscout]

Dad and kid likely worked well together - talented passive aggressive kid (Tiger) with dad who has military backround and knew how to get everyone on track. Perfect combo. Thats what its all about as a sports coach or boss in a business - be exactly what that athlete or partner in your end success (an employee) needs and squeeze as much juice as you possibly can out of that orange. Tiger's dad did that big time, and I think the kid loved life when papa was around! What a great father - son deal.

[don_budge]

gary player on lessons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0T-20-8FJk

Interesting interview overall. I saw this segment before the one on technology ruining the game. The comments have to be examined in context. He was talking about Tiger Woods and mentioned that perhaps if he had been left untinkered with he may have produced upwards of ten more Major Championships.

Tiger Woods seemed to lose his way when his father passed away. For sure...his father was behind the molding of the man and I think Tiger was a bit lost without him. He was relatively young to lose such an important figure in his life. Woods was going from coach to coach and who knows the real story behind the tinkering but there is an old saying that if it isn't broke don't fix it.

The golf swing is a rather complicated motion. Not that the fundamentals are so difficult to understand or even produce for a talented athlete. It's just that the thing seems to change on it's own and it never lasts forever. Players have to adapt to changes in their bodies and most difficult...in their mental and emotional state.

Gary Player is a fascinating interview. He goes on to say how he could have been invaluable to Tiger as his "mentor". That's what I took away. Look how the top players are going to older champions for the benefit of their experience. Most of all it is lonely at the top and these guys need someone to look up to and trust with their insecurities about their games or other personal matters. I am not so certain they are there solely for their coaching. That being said perhaps Player is right in this regard with respect to Woods. Woods sorely missed his father's stabilizing influence and as an older man it is possible that Player could have had a very positive influence on him. Woods could possibly have benefited from Player particularly as a black man playing in a white man's game. Gary Player being South African would have a pretty good handle on some of the complicated nature of the culture for Tiger.

[hockeyscout]

gary player on lessons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0T-20-8FJk