The Tennis Thread - Part 3

[chamber-music]

I don't get the hate for Serena. People seem to really hate her for some reason.

 

[Iceman]

Do they? Maybe because she wins so often. Although Federer seems very popular.

 

[regwec]

I don't hate Serena at all, but the sheer predictability with which she overpowers her opponents is extremely boring. That is not her fault, but it does lead me to root for whomever she is playing.

I'm not a Federer fan, but when he wins it is usually a masterclass of skill and creativity, without the sense of inevitability these days.

 

[Iceman]

Would be nice to see someone who could match Serena shot for shot.

I'm generally not a fan of (mainly male) big servers without much else to their game. Federer was a magician at his peak. But he's still been very consistent years after he started losing his edge. I always want him to win out of the current players, even if just to cement his record.

 

[Sakuraba]

I don't get the hate for Serena. People seem to really hate her for some reason.

I think a lot of it is that she is the archetype player in a very boring and undiversified era of women's tennis. Female tennis is all about power, and there's none more powerful than S.Williams. That's why Sharapova cannot defeat her. Sharapova has no variety, so her master plan is just hit the ball harder and pump her fists. Well that's great except when the person across the net has access to much bigger and easier power, not to mention a technically superior serve.

For Williams, I think there's also some residual baggage from the prime years she squandered doing whatever the heck she was doing. Tennis is obviously the focal point of the lives of tennis media and fans, so when the WTA's biggest star plainly says tennis isn't the most important thing to her and stops trying to be the best, there will be backlash from the media and fans, fairly or not.

As for top players being able to come from behind, sometimes it's the underdog feeling the pressure to close it out and sometimes (especially with Djokovic) it's the higher ranked player loosening up. Bob Dylan said it best, "when you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose." At the start, it's Anderson with nothing to lose, but when he's up two sets to love, all of the sudden it's his match to lose.

The psychology of being up or down two sets is certainly a fascinating subject.

 

[regwec]

It is similar to the notion that, in cricket, there are two types of specialist batsmen: those who get nervous on 0 not out, and those who get nervous on 95 not out.

 

[Sakuraba]

Federer's popularity has been like a snowball effect for years now, some reasons for this:

1. He's a winner. We measure greatness by Slam titles, so none are greater than Federer. People attach themselves to great players.

2. He's smart with endorsements. He has been highly profitable with Nike, a company that deals with the finest athletes in each sport. And Federer has cultivated an image of suaveness and a kind of everyman luxury. While he can promote unattainable riches like Rolex and Mercedes, fans also can see him struggle and sweat and cry on court. No other sport is as personal for the fan like tennis, where it's just an individual on the court, no helmet or mask, a million camera close ups. Every move and facial expression is there for us to see. So his luxurious image comes with a personal touch. He also doesn't hide his family.

3. Federer can certainly be a dick and has given his fair share of backhanded compliments and unsportsmanlike comments. But he also speaks the popular languages fluently, and he has a goofy, giddy sense of humor when he wins. Fans embrace that.

4. I was once told that 90% of being an effective leader was looking cool. No one since Borg has done a better job of creating a classic image that has broad appeal. People that don't know Federer, you can show them, and they'll say he must be a winner just based on his appearance.

5. And this is where Father Time helps too. Federer is a throwback player. He plays the game differently than the other top players, and he has real variety in an era where it isn't really necessary to be successful. What's funny is that Federer only recently has really developed his game at net, he's always had the natural gifts to be successful there, but now he's made it a key part of his tactical game.

People appreciate this, so it goes beyond his longevity. Not only is he the only Top Ten player from 2002 left that's any good, he's the only Top 100 player too! All of his contemporaries are already in the grave, and Federer is dipping into the next two generations of players. Nadal isn't even a real peer of his, it's just that Nadal was the last of the teenage phenoms, so he sneaked into Federer's prime years before his own time.

6. He's cultural. It goes beyond language. No one does a better job of going to places all over the world and kissing those nations and towns arses better than Federer.

7. I think a major turning point where he went from just being popular to the guy that gets cheered everywhere against everyone came in 2007 and 2008. That Darth Federer outfit at the 2007 USO got him a lot of cool points and won him a lot of casual fans. People that don't watch tennis are Federer fans. And then his slump in 2008 followed by his summer resurgence with his silly antics with Wawrinka at the Olympics, and then his heart-on-his-sleeve performance to win the 2008 USO, that won him a lot of sympathy points. Then you could also tack on his tearful loss to Nadal at the 2009 AO, as vomit-inducing as it was, it won him some more sympathy. People grew emotionally attached to the dude.

 

[Sakuraba]

I could add on to this here, and say that Nadal giving up the pirate pants and sleeveless shirts right when he ascended the throne after the 2008 season was a mistake. That was his look, and I think Nike screwed up putting him in tight shorts and making him wear collared shirts. Maybe it was Nadal's decision, who knows, but it didn't work.

 

[Dark Raven]

Nadal should take up that look again, and add to it with a pirate's headband and an eyepatch. Doesn't matter if his eye isn't injured. He should just play with one eye. He could wear a hoot on his hand too and a peg leg.

 

[Iceman]

I don't find Djokovic or Murray to be particularly likeable so Fed has it easy at the moment in the popularity stakes. Never been much of a fan of Sharapova though.

 

[Iceman]

Nadal should take up that look again, and add to it with a pirate's headband and an eyepatch. Doesn't matter if his eye isn't injured. He should just play with one eye. He could wear a hoot on his hand too and a peg leg.

He should train a parrot to play too so that there would be 2 chances of getting every ball back. Could also distract the umpire when necessary.

 

[Dark Raven]

I meant hook by the way. Auto correct strikes again.

 

[Sakuraba]

Nadal should take up that look again, and add to it with a pirate's headband and an eyepatch. Doesn't matter if his eye isn't injured. He should just play with one eye. He could wear a hoot on his hand too and a peg leg.

LOL, the way it's going for Nadal I would expect him to lose an eye and get fitted for peg legs

 

[Sakuraba]

It's not really fair to hate Sharapova for her style. In that case you'd have to hate the whole WTA like I do. The don't change direction, angle, pace, or spin Tour. And oh yeah, stay away from the net at all costs. And don't ever learn how to serve properly. Just hit it hard, flat, and crosscourt, baby. But hey, when you have blonde hair, blue eyes, and nice legs it doesn't matter if you have all the grace of Frankenstein's monster.

Now you could hate Sharapova for her phony allegiance to Mother Russia...

 

[Dark Raven]

Sharapova has green eyes not blue.

She could be better as a player, but she will always be my favourite.

The WTA has evolved mostly into a power game though, because that's what is almost needed to compete with the likes of the Williams sisters just to get a hit on the ball. That's why I don't like them dominating so much, because it becomes like men's tennis. However, with real men's tennis, because everyone does actually hit the ball harder but at a more equal force, players can then actually use other skills because they're not just trying to stay alive.

 

[regwec]

People that don't know Federer, you can show them, and they'll say he must be a winner just based on his appearance.

I just threw up a bit.

 

[Dark Raven]

Does Murray look like he's got a bald spot on top?

Andrew Garfield kind of looks a bit similar to him.

 

[regwec]

He is thinning out, yes.

Murray went up slightly in my estimations when he hired Amélie Mauresmo, and faced down all the sexist BS that followed.

 

[Sakuraba]

All I would like to see from Sharapova or Azarenka, or anyone really is to develop a good slice. That is such an effective weapon against Williams, Stosur set the blueprint for how to use it when she won the USO. Watching Williams try to hit up at it with her flat shots, her game completely self destructed. I'm not saying you can go out there and slice Williams off the court consistently, but it is something that is effective against her. Having some tactical options would maybe help Sharapova win more than a handful of games. It's almost like she is content with losing to Williams, seeing as how her game hasn't evolved in meaningful ways

 

[regwec]

How do you compare the overall standard of the women's and the men's games, given that the women are paid more (per set)?

 

[Dark Raven]

Well the thing is that Sharapova reverts to type when facing Williams, and any game plan she might have goes out the window. That's because Williams is so intimidating and plays very personally against her and gets inside her head. She literally blasts her off the court and serves or returns so aggressively that Maria can't get a touch on the ball. That's been happening for the past 10 years.

You generally don't see Serena Williams playing at that intensity for a whole match against other players. She might step up when in trouble, but she generally is a little more relaxed. But against Sharapova she is just seething, and you can clearly see it in her face. She suddenly looks like Mike Tyson about to demolish one of his opponents.

Also, Maria's coaches haven't been so superb. For years, she didn't even seem to have one but just let her father coach her, and then it was that other guy who isn't the one she has now. She ought to get one with more variety, just like Murray got Lendl and then Mauresmo.

 

[Sakuraba]

Coaching has been an issue on both Tours, but especially the WTA for over a decade now. The coaches can't even teach the ladies how to serve right. Honestly, most players would be better off coachless. They certainly wouldn't be any worse in most cases. This isn't an indictment against all coaches, but 95% of them are still collecting checks without any proven results.

It is very telling that the coaches that have done the most good as of late have been recently retired pros and not career coaches: Lendl, Norman, Edberg, Mauresmo. I kind of like the idea of Edberg being a part-time coach. A guy that comes in with fresh eyes and fresh ideas. Not everyone can be as dedicatedly brilliant as a Toni Nadal and watch the same kid play for 25 years and know the right buttons to push. But coaching, and the whole entourage-based tennis that has been en vogue, has been a detriment to the game.

But at least there has been a slight curtailing of the influx of underdeveloped teenagers turning pro and then never having a chance to develop further.

 

[Sakuraba]

How do you compare the overall standard of the women's and the men's games, given that the women are paid more (per set)?

What do you mean when you say standard? The quality of play?

 

[Dark Raven]

Coaching has been an issue on both Tours, but especially the WTA for over a decade now. The coaches can't even teach the ladies how to serve right. Honestly, most players would be better off coachless. They certainly wouldn't be any worse in most cases. This isn't an indictment against all coaches, but 95% of them are still collecting checks without any proven results.

It is very telling that the coaches that have done the most good as of late have been recently retired pros and not career coaches: Lendl, Norman, Edberg, Mauresmo. I kind of like the idea of Edberg being a part-time coach. A guy that comes in with fresh eyes and fresh ideas. Not everyone can be as dedicatedly brilliant as a Toni Nadal and watch the same kid play for 25 years and know the right buttons to push. But coaching, and the whole entourage-based tennis that has been en vogue, has been a detriment to the game.

But at least there has been a slight curtailing of the influx of underdeveloped teenagers turning pro and then never having a chance to develop further.

Connors did offer to coach Sharapova, but that never worked out. He coached Roddick for a little while. What's happened to Roddick? Has he retired?

Edberg had a very varied game.

Boris Becker has looked overweight for the past few years somehow.

 

[Sakuraba]

Roddick has been gone for a few years now. He's actually commenting for Wimbledon this year. Oh god do I have memories of Connor-coached Roddick. His frequent kamikaze trips to the net still give me nightmares. Tactics without the technique to pull it off

Roddick could probably still go out there and make quarters at Wimbledon

Becker is getting fat off of his book money lol