PDA

View Full Version : French Open seems weak, because it is.


Kobble
06-02-2007, 05:38 AM
When a half-hearted Moya can move through the draw so well, it has to be weak.

-Ferrero isn't Ferrero.
-Moya is basically retired.
-Ancic sick.
-Haas injured.
-Murray injured.
-Nalbandian is no better than he has ever been.
-Marcos is unpredictable, and Safin is even worse.
-Top this off with Coria gone, and Guga crippled.

It seems that everyone who could add depth to this tournament is either injured or out to lunch(mentally). Great early round grinds were a trademark of the French Open; I feel it is missing that this year.

Fedexeon
06-02-2007, 05:42 AM
Nalbandian always plays better in Grand Slam tournament.
If you say players like Djokovic, Davydenko, Federer, Nadal, Hewitt.. are weak, you yourself have some problems.

Supernatural_Serve
06-02-2007, 05:50 AM
OP, you do have a point. Just look at the top 10 or 20 men. Plenty of great players, but not a lot of clay court grinders on the list.

The modern power game is where it is at.

For the most part, gone are the days of the great serve and volleyers on grass. Unfortunately, it may not be long before the hard fought games on clay are a thing of the past too.

federerfanatic
06-02-2007, 05:58 AM
When a half-hearted Moya can move through the draw so well, it has to be weak.

If Moya was such a weak player he wouldnt still be playing well vs tough players. He beat Canas in straight sets on hard courts, and took Federer to 3 sets on clay, as well as either beating or taking Nadal to 3 sets his last 3 matches with him(all best 2-of-3).

-Ferrero isn't Ferrero.

You are right, but clay court grinders dont have long primes. Nadal is nearing the end of his too.

-Moya is basically retired.

Playing pretty well for a basically retired player.

-Ancic sick.

Ancic is not a contender at the French Open anyway.

-Haas injured.

Haas is not a contender at the French Open anyway.

-Murray injured.

Murray is not a contender at the French Open anyway.

-Nalbandian is no better than he has ever been.

Still a pretty good player.

-Marcos is unpredictable, and Safin is even worse.

This is supposed to be some new revelation?

-Top this off with Coria gone, and Guga crippled.

Kuerten is 30 so he should be past his past and close to retiring anyway. Coria wasnt that good, he was a mental flake with a weak serve and no power to speak of.

Kobble
06-02-2007, 05:59 AM
Davydenko isn't beating Federer and Hewitt isn't beating Nadal. Djokovic, however, captures my interest, because his court sense is still growing. The matches are really Canas vs. Federer, and Djokovic/Baghdatis vs. Nadal. Then, the finals should be good, but until then, it is routine.

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
06-02-2007, 06:02 AM
There are still alot of excellent players that can play well on clay still left in the tournament.

Looking at the draw, there are some great matches to come and as the draw gets smaller, the better they will get.

Kobble
06-02-2007, 06:08 AM
federerfanatic, claycourt players don't have long primes? They last as long as any. Kuerten was tough for more than 5 years, and would still be if it wasn't for injuries. Agassi made finals nearly a decade apart, winning one of them. Courier was also competitive for a long time. Same with Corretja. There was also Borg. You are probably thinking in terms of Ferrero and Coria-a blip on the radar.

J-man
06-02-2007, 06:14 AM
When a half-hearted Moya can move through the draw so well, it has to be weak.

-Ferrero isn't Ferrero.
-Moya is basically retired.
-Ancic sick.
-Haas injured.
-Murray injured.
-Nalbandian is no better than he has ever been.
-Marcos is unpredictable, and Safin is even worse.
-Top this off with Coria gone, and Guga crippled.

It seems that everyone who could add depth to this tournament is either injured or out to lunch(mentally). Great early round grinds were a trademark of the French Open; I feel it is missing that this year.None of these players really have added or taken away from the French. The only ones that are probably disspointing are Murray, Nalbandian (but he's been out of it for awhile), and Haas.

Zaragoza
06-02-2007, 06:21 AM
So what about Wimbledon with Bjorkman at 34 and Baghdatis making the SF?
Does it make Wimbledon weak? Itīs exactly the opposite:this is the greatness of Grand Slams. You donīt expect some players to reach the latest rounds but they are there and itīs more than deserved.

federerfanatic
06-02-2007, 06:24 AM
federerfanatic, claycourt players don't have long primes? They last as long as any. Kuerten was tough for more than 5 years,

Kuerten's 97 French Open win was a huge fluke in hindsight, at that point in time. He wasnt a top player at all in 97 and 98 outside of that win and was unseeded by the time he defended his French Open title in 98 even with the benefit of the points of his 97 French Open title. That says something about the rest of his results in 97 and 98. Remember the top 16 then were seeded, he did so little anywhere else even with points from the previous years French Open title he still couldnt rank in the top 16 by the 98 French Open. Kuerten's prime was definitely only 99-2001, a 3 years prime. His 97 French Open win was a hugely premature out of nowhere type thing, similar to Sampras's 1990 U.S Open win, although Sampras was atleast a top player in 91 and 92 he too was clearly not in his prime yet.

and would still be if it wasn't for injuries.

Debateable and will never be proven. Also even though he is a clay courter he doesnt play a "grinding" style either, so doesnt even really fall into that category.

Agassi made finals nearly a decade apart, winning one of them.

Agassi game is to grind his opponents down, totally different. It is not to be grinded, while counterpunching the way Nadal, Corretja, Wilander, Chang, all are. Plus how many years in a row was Agassi ever at his best. His career was stop and go, a year or two there, a year or two there.

Courier was also competitive for a long time.

Courier had only a 3 year prime at best, 91-93. By 94 he was already a shadow of his old self and fell out of the top 10 by years end, only to very briefly appear at the bottom of the top 10 again before falling out for good.

Same with Corretja.

Corretja had a 5 year prime probably, 97-2001. Not too bad but not that long. Players like Sampras, Becker, Edberg, probably Federer will have much longer primes then that, closer to a whole decade.

There was also Borg.

Again not too bad as longevity goes, but still retired at 25. Plus while he was a grinder he did not rely on it as much as many of those others. He had a much stronger serve, he could volley much more effectively, he could hit the ball earlier with more raquet speed even with the wooden raquets then these more prototypical "grinders" do with a graphite.

federerfanatic
06-02-2007, 06:30 AM
Davydenko isn't beating Federer and Hewitt isn't beating Nadal. Djokovic, however, captures my interest, because his court sense is still growing. The matches are really Canas vs. Federer, and Djokovic/Baghdatis vs. Nadal. Then, the finals should be good, but until then, it is routine.

Davydenko and Hewitt are still more significant then most of the players you listed that the tournament is missing. Do you honestly think Ancic, Haas, or Murray(on clay)were any kind of threat to beat Federer or Nadal, or any moreso then Davydenko or Hewitt are? ROTFL!!! Also Nalbandian, Baghdatis, and Safin, should be expected to be more of a threat to Federer or Nadal on clay, please.

ACE of Hearts
06-02-2007, 06:46 AM
Hewitt can beat Nadal if Nadal is off his game.

War, Safin!
06-02-2007, 06:54 AM
This thread should actually read 'Men's tennis today in general seems weak, because it is'.


End of.

ACE of Hearts
06-02-2007, 06:56 AM
Its not weak at all, only people who live in the 90s would say that.There are alot of young guys out there and u have the names u would expect on clay.

War, Safin!
06-02-2007, 07:12 AM
Its not weak at all, only people who live in the 90s would say that.There are alot of young guys out there and u have the names u would expect on clay.
1997
Sampras
Ivanisevic
Muster
Becker
Chang
Rusedski
Kafelnikov
Krajicek
Rafter
Moya

2007
Federer
Nadal
Ljubicic
Djokovic
Davydenko
Roddick
Robredo
Blake
Baghdatis
Gonzalez

http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/images/smilies/dunno.gif

ACE of Hearts
06-02-2007, 07:17 AM
Oh plz, we are talking clay here.To me the game of tennis has gotten better since the 90s.The players return better.U should have Safin's name there.He is just very unmotivated.

War, Safin!
06-02-2007, 07:19 AM
Oh plz, we are talking clay here.To me the game of tennis has gotten better since the 90s.The players return better.
The thread-starter was talking clay.

Mind you, I thought I would try and make things 'fair' by leaving out fellow 'Hall of Famers', Andre Agassi and Jim Courier .

Actually, they weren't in the Top10 in 1997.

Andres
06-02-2007, 07:20 AM
Hewitt can beat Nadal if Nadal is off his game.
He couldn't in Hamburg, and Nadal was quite off.
Why would Roland Garros be different?

War, Safin!
06-02-2007, 07:20 AM
Oh plz, we are talking clay here.To me the game of tennis has gotten better since the 90s.The players return better.U should have Safin's name there.He is just very unmotivated.
Safin ain't in the Top 10.

Gugarocks
06-02-2007, 07:29 AM
Coria wasnt that good, he was a mental flake with a weak serve and no power to speak of.

Coria was amazing, the serve was never fantastic, but it was very well placed and full of slice / spin. He only started to serve terribly after he had a shoulder surgery.

I also miss Kuerten a lot, he was unique. Kuerten and Nadal are the only players who can beat Roger Federer on clay.

Andres
06-02-2007, 07:30 AM
Coria was amazing, the serve was never fantastic, but it was very well placed and full of slice / spin. He only started to serve terribly after he had a shoulder surgery.

I also miss Kuerten a lot, he was unique. Kuerten and Nadal are the only players who can beat Roger Federer on clay.
Nah, he started to serve even better after the surgery. But the % dropped. Specially between January-April 2005.

Then tried to come back, changing grips, and stance, and that's where his serve got screwed.

aramis
06-02-2007, 08:00 AM
RG was even worse last year. At least this year we have a resurgent Hewitt and Moya, and Davydenko who is the new Ferrero. But it would be so much better if the original JCF and Coria would return. This sappy and endless Federer/Nadal drama is getting disgusting. Their matches aren't even that good; only thing interesting is the result.

But I agree that there was more depth in the clay court game 4-7 years ago, and more variety in the style of play. Nowadays it seems that most players are just playing hard court tennis on clay.

NamRanger
06-02-2007, 08:11 AM
He couldn't in Hamburg, and Nadal was quite off.
Why would Roland Garros be different?


RG is a much faster surface then Hamburg, it will help Hewitt out quite abit considering most of his shots weren't really penetrating on the Hamburg surface. Hewitt when he was playing pretty bad took a set off of Nadal at the FO before, I don't see why when he's playing well he can't actually beat him.

Morrissey
06-02-2007, 08:23 AM
Hewitt can beat Nadal if Nadal is off his game.

Nadal was off his game in Hamburg and still won.

forzainter
06-02-2007, 08:39 AM
You are right, but clay court grinders dont have long primes. Nadal is nearing the end of his too.

what? Nadal has one loss on clay and now hes near the end of his prime? hes not even 21 yet, but will be tommorow

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-02-2007, 10:13 AM
i dont think its weak, and sure moya is half hearted, but he still has the heart of a champion, because he won a slam.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-02-2007, 10:14 AM
Nadal was off his game in Hamburg and still won.

only federer can beat nadal on slams and only nadal can beat federer on slams, long shot? tell me about it.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-02-2007, 10:15 AM
RG is a much faster surface then Hamburg, it will help Hewitt out quite abit considering most of his shots weren't really penetrating on the Hamburg surface. Hewitt when he was playing pretty bad took a set off of Nadal at the FO before, I don't see why when he's playing well he can't actually beat him.
wait, didnt nadal beat hewitt in r16 paris last year?

federerfanatic
06-02-2007, 10:20 AM
Coria was amazing, the serve was never fantastic, but it was very well placed and full of slice / spin. He only started to serve terribly after he had a shoulder surgery.

I also miss Kuerten a lot, he was unique. Kuerten and Nadal are the only players who can beat Roger Federer on clay.

Coria was not amazing in anyway. He was very good on clay, and arguably the best clay court player in the World in 2004 in a weak clay court field, even weaker then the weak clay court field the much superior Nadal(compared to Coria that is) dominates today. I honestly think Federer would beat Coria regularly even on clay, even in Coria's prime, despite it being Fed's worst surface by such a huge margin. In 2004 and 2005 Federer won both his matches with Coria on clay, and he was not as consistent and comfortable on clay as the last 2 years.

He was an interesting player with alot of touch and speed. However seriously lacked power in all his shots, including his groundstrokes. He would often open up the court for winners and not be able to put them away, sometimes he would resort to trying drop shots since he didnt have the power to finish the point even after opening up the court. His serve was just an average plop over the net, even before the shoulder surgery. It was very easy to return or even attack whenever you wanted, only hard to hit clean return winners because of his speed and anticipation. Mentally he was a huge flake. He choked in the 2 biggest matches of his life at the French Open, the semis of 2003 to Verkerk, and the finals of 2004 to Gaudio. He even choked in the 2005 Rome final to Nadal.