PDA

View Full Version : Nadal needs to develop a 1hbh if he wants to win Wimbledon.


Ripper
06-15-2007, 04:41 PM
Also, he needs to hit with his right arm...







































See how stupid it sounds?

BigServer1
06-15-2007, 04:43 PM
Oh man, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. Thank you for some clarity on this issue.

pow
06-15-2007, 04:48 PM
Exactly what I was thinking!

8PAQ
06-15-2007, 05:03 PM
He needs to develop shorter shorts and sleeves.

Nadal_Freak
06-15-2007, 05:54 PM
Nadal also needs to change his grip.

Forehand Forever
06-15-2007, 08:34 PM
I hate these topics, Fed needs to develop this, Nadal needs to develop that. They're all quite pointless.

fednad
06-15-2007, 08:37 PM
I hate these topics, Fed needs to develop this, Nadal needs to develop that. They're all quite pointless.

I think this thread is a sarcastic response to an earlie thread sugesting Roger should play with 2 handed bach hand if he wants to win French

Attila the tennis Bum
06-15-2007, 09:14 PM
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Thanks:) .

On the other hand...you may actually have a point. Nadal actually does slice with one hand....and its a pretty damn good slice. very overlooked by most.

Starwind
06-15-2007, 11:07 PM
I think he should also probably switch to a 90 sq inch. or less racquet...

Eviscerator
06-15-2007, 11:33 PM
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Thanks:) .



:roll:

Delude yourself if it lets you sleep at night. :roll:

alan-n
06-15-2007, 11:36 PM
On the other hand...you may actually have a point. Nadal actually does slice with one hand....and its a pretty damn good slice. very overlooked by most.

Yep, especially that one handed slice on match point vs Federer at last years Wimbledon. Federer fell over on that shot, good thing he held onto his racquet.

fednad
06-15-2007, 11:37 PM
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Thanks:) .

On the other hand...you may actually have a point. Nadal actually does slice with one hand....and its a pretty damn good slice. very overlooked by most.

Somebody's imitation is somebody else's sarcasm.......

Mad iX
06-16-2007, 03:58 AM
Nadal can hit a 1hbh. He's done it in practise. Obviously nowhere near as good as his 2-hander.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 04:10 AM
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Thanks:) .

On the other hand...you may actually have a point. Nadal actually does slice with one hand....and its a pretty damn good slice. very overlooked by most.

well....4000 views and like 400 posts and now an actual string simply in honor of me? And all for simply saying Fed should uses a 2 hander against nadal at the FO? Damn I truly am flattered.:p

It just goes to show you how stubborn people are too change. Just remeber everyone was agianst Columbus when he said the world was round.

You want Fed to do the same old thing over and over again. Fed will continue to lose at the FO if he keeps this up.

In fact, now that his weakness is so completely exposed I predict everyone will be hitting high topspins to his backhand.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 04:13 AM
Nadal can hit a 1hbh. He's done it in practise. Obviously nowhere near as good as his 2-hander.

and thats why Federer can simply give a two hander a try against Nadal on this high backhands.

dennis10is
06-16-2007, 05:13 AM
Nadal should change his citizenship to either a Swede or a Swiss and he'll win Wimbledon. It was clear that his Spanish citizenship hampered his grass court prowess.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 05:34 AM
Yep, especially that one handed slice on match point vs Federer at last years Wimbledon. Federer fell over on that shot, good thing he held onto his racquet.


wow. I don't remember that one. I am not sure exactly what you mean by "fell over"? Are you saying that Nadal hit an awesome one handed slice and Roger could not handle it?

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 05:40 AM
wow. I don't remember that one. I am not sure exactly what you mean by "fell over"? Are you saying that Nadal hit an awesome one handed slice and Roger could not handle it?

You so wanna be Nadal's bum buddy!.........

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 05:43 AM
Yep, especially that one handed slice on match point vs Federer at last years Wimbledon. Federer fell over on that shot, good thing he held onto his racquet.


wow. I don't remember that one. I am not sure exactly what you mean by "fell over"? Are you saying that Nadal hit an awesome one handed slice and Roger could not handle it?

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 05:46 AM
You so wanna be Nadal's bum buddy!.........

well...I guess its time to lower myself to your level:

http://images.sportsline.com/images/spin/spun/spun-612.jpg

nuff said!

crazylevity
06-16-2007, 06:04 AM
well....4000 views and like 400 posts and now an actual string simply in honor of me? And all for simply saying Fed should uses a 2 hander against nadal at the FO? Damn I truly am flattered.:p

It just goes to show you how stubborn people are too change. Just remeber everyone was agianst Columbus when he said the world was round.

You want Fed to do the same old thing over and over again. Fed will continue to lose at the FO if he keeps this up.

In fact, now that his weakness is so completely exposed I predict everyone will be hitting high topspins to his backhand.

oh please, that has been the modus operandi for everyone since 2004. Agassi, Safin, Nalbandian, everyone has been trying to do that every single time they play Federer. Federer just used to most of it back defensively, waiting to unleash forehand winners. And now? He just hits winners with his backhand. Look at Basel last year, Australian Open this year.

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 06:13 AM
Yeah Attila, that picture would affect me if I were actually a fan of Federer you mental midget..

You are sitting there just laughing away at how funny you are, yet, I feel for you deeply.. It's people like you that enter schools and workplaces and shoot people..

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 06:27 AM
oh please, that has been the modus operandi for everyone since 2004. Agassi, Safin, Nalbandian, everyone has been trying to do that every single time they play Federer. Federer just used to most of it back defensively, waiting to unleash forehand winners. And now? He just hits winners with his backhand. Look at Basel last year, Australian Open this year.

Thats a very valid point. There are not many people who can hit the type of topspin that Nadal can.

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 06:31 AM
Thats a very valid point. There are not many people who can hit the type of topspin that Nadal can.

And please explain this magic topspin Nadal can hit.. I am sure everyone would love to know?...

And why can he hit it, and no one else?

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 06:41 AM
And please explain this magic topspin Nadal can hit.. I am sure everyone would love to know?...

And why can he hit it, and no one else?

sure...but its not really magic.

First of all nadal is I believe the only lefty in the top ten. His spin kicks the "wrong way" . Its very hard to deal with.

Secondly if you read this months Tennis magazine they call nadals stroke something like the "fillsbury flop". Its a trick stroke....its sort of a wild one.

Thirdly...have you seen the pipes on nadal?? He may just well be the strongest player on the tour. He can smack that ball pretty violently.

Fourth, there is an article in the other post that said exactly this...but I don't have time to cut and paste right now. When I come back though I will be happy to find it for you. Your anticipated cooperation is greatly anticipated.

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 06:46 AM
Oh, I get it now.. You read something in a magazine, and then you jump on a message board like an expert and start teaching people the finer points of tennis?..

As for his "pipes"... Um .. You sooo wanna marry him, dont you?

Eviscerator
06-16-2007, 11:21 AM
[/I]

It just goes to show you how stubborn people are too change. Just remeber everyone was agianst Columbus when he said the world was round.




:roll: :roll: :roll:

Pot calling the kettle black perhaps?

alan-n
06-16-2007, 12:22 PM
wow. I don't remember that one. I am not sure exactly what you mean by "fell over"? Are you saying that Nadal hit an awesome one handed slice and Roger could not handle it?

Haha nice try but no cigar. Nadal's slices does a good job of giving the points away unlike how Federer uses his slices.

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 03:03 PM
Dont worry about it.. This Attila person is an attention hoar.. He is on a few threads just starting crap with people..

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 05:25 PM
I suggested that Federer use a two handed backhand against nadals high topspin.

You have all suggested that he just continue to lose and keep doing the same old thing.

The only suggestion that I have heard thus far from you guys is that Federer should slice while pinned back at the baseline. That is complete suicide. I have already shown the weakness of that point....no need to discuss it again.

But the bottom line is that I have offered a solution and you guys have offered nothing.

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 05:35 PM
I suggested that Federer use a two handed backhand against nadals high topspin.

You have all suggested that he just continue to lose and keep doing the same old thing.

The only suggestion that I have heard thus far from you guys is that Federer should slice while pinned back at the baseline. That is complete suicide. I have already shown the weakness of that point....no need to discuss it again.

But the bottom line is that I have offered a solution and you guys have offered nothing.

Dude, Fed lost a grand slam final.. So what!.. Happens every year to great champions.. Alot of good players have lived without winning the French.. You talk like Fed should change everything, because of one player.. The guy is still only 25-6.. He has plenty of time to win one...

Again, your dumbness is almost laughable.. How old are you?

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 05:49 PM
Dude, Fed lost a grand slam final.. So what!.. Happens every year to great champions.. Alot of good players have lived without winning the French.. You talk like Fed should change everything, because of one player.. The guy is still only 25-6.. He has plenty of time to win one...

Again, your dumbness is almost laughable.. How old are you?

No what I said is that Fed should simply change it on high topspin shots at the french open against Nadal. His one handed backhand is obviously not working on those particular shots.

Eviscerator
06-16-2007, 05:59 PM
I suggested that Federer use a two handed backhand against nadals high topspin.



But the bottom line is that I have offered a solution and you guys have offered nothing.

I stopped responding in your absurd thread, but over here let me take the chance of being redundant. Your suggestion would be laughed out of town by any knowledgeable tennis pro or coach. You have NOT offered a "solution", you have proffered an unintelligent and unrealistic opinion. The worst part is you tried shooting down other peoples more realistic suggestions such as a grip change more akin to Guga's with misinformation and skepticism. It is one thing to be wrong, but it is quite another to knock realistic suggestions to defend your off the wall one.

After a while it became clear that you are only baiting people to keep your absurd thread alive. Now you are boasting about the number of posts/views which only goes to expose your true motivation. I don't remember ever having any harsh words with you as I try to get along with others, regardless if their view is different than mine. However, according to other posters this is not the first time you have come up with absurd threads/posts/ideas. I wont judge you by their opinions of you, but if you keep this crazy idea going it will certainly speak volumes about your intentions/mindset.

Good evening

VikingSamurai
06-16-2007, 06:07 PM
Very well put..........

stormholloway
06-16-2007, 06:30 PM
I suggested that Federer use a two handed backhand against nadals high topspin.

You have all suggested that he just continue to lose and keep doing the same old thing.

The only suggestion that I have heard thus far from you guys is that Federer should slice while pinned back at the baseline. That is complete suicide. I have already shown the weakness of that point....no need to discuss it again.

But the bottom line is that I have offered a solution and you guys have offered nothing.

There is nothing technically wrong with Federer's shots.

Your suggestion is just amateur and ridiculous. You should stop repeating it.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 07:45 PM
There is nothing technically wrong with Federer's shots.

Your suggestion is just amateur and ridiculous. You should stop repeating it.

Its obviously the wrong strategy against Nadal at the FO. I really do not see any other choice for him ...do you?

You are saying that he should just keep doing the same thing...then he might as well just give up now.

To be quite frank...federer was beaten quite badly. isn't it obvious he needs to do something VERY different against Nadal at the FO?

stormholloway
06-16-2007, 08:32 PM
I think Federer should look to come in to net more. People have said this, but he hasn't really done it. Nadal hits with a lot of spin but those kinds of shots are more effective when they bounce rather than if they're taken out of the air. Some of the effectiveness of heavy topspin shots is taken away if you volley those balls.

Name one player who switches to a different backhand (meaning 1 hand vs. 2 hands) for certain players on certain surfaces. Just stop this nonsense.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-16-2007, 08:38 PM
I think Federer should look to come in to net more. People have said this, but he hasn't really done it. Nadal hits with a lot of spin but those kinds of shots are more effective when they bounce rather than if they're taken out of the air. Some of the effectiveness of heavy topspin shots is taken away if you volley those balls.

Name one player who switches to a different backhand (meaning 1 hand vs. 2 hands) for certain players on certain surfaces. Just stop this nonsense.

He cannot come into net more from that position. He can barely reach the ball...LOOK!!!:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/skills/5019976.stm

name one player who has ever hit a backhand like Borg??? In fact Borg was the very first player to ever hit with an open stance.

How many players volley with two hands?? But Santoro is still one of the top three doubles players in the world.

Who has a service motion like mcenroe, Roddick, or Tanner????

The list goes on and on.

baller
06-16-2007, 11:16 PM
Its obviously the wrong strategy against Nadal at the FO. I really do not see any other choice for him ...do you?

You are saying that he should just keep doing the same thing...then he might as well just give up now.

To be quite frank...federer was beaten quite badly. isn't it obvious he needs to do something VERY different against Nadal at the FO?

1. dont make over 50+ UFE, 40+ off the fh which is herladed as the "best shot in tennis"

2. If you get 10 break chances in a set, convert more than zero.

3. regarding the high balls to his backhand - step in and take the ball on the rise. not as easy as it sounds but its only a matter of adjusting his timing to nadal's spin/power. no 2h backhand is needed for this.

roger has made a consicence decision to back up and let the ball jump over his head on the BH side, that decision is his mistake. hitting with 1 or 2 hands is not the issue, its where he chooses to strike the ball from

arnz
06-16-2007, 11:42 PM
Yeah Attila, that picture would affect me if I were actually a fan of Federer you mental midget..

You are sitting there just laughing away at how funny you are, yet, I feel for you deeply.. It's people like you that enter schools and workplaces and shoot people..

I havent read the original thread, but I do agree with the premise that its kinda ridiculous for Fed to use 2 hands at the FO and only for Nadal. It took Pete Sampras years and years to develop a one hander, and he started as a junior, when you can afford to at least take chances and allow a shot to develop.

The reason I am quoting you is I also think it ridiculous to label a message board troll (if that is what the OP is) a potential murderer just because he is a Nadal fanboy...dont you think that is going over the top??

I kinda enjoy the banter between the trolls in here, mostly dealing with tennis, but that I think goes over the line, and out of nowhere, especially in light of the recent events in the US, which have seriously affected many people.

isuk@tennis
06-17-2007, 12:04 AM
i thought this thread was about nadal switching to one hand backhand how come it went back to fed?

VikingSamurai
06-17-2007, 02:11 AM
I havent read the original thread, but I do agree with the premise that its kinda ridiculous for Fed to use 2 hands at the FO and only for Nadal. It took Pete Sampras years and years to develop a one hander, and he started as a junior, when you can afford to at least take chances and allow a shot to develop.

The reason I am quoting you is I also think it ridiculous to label a message board troll (if that is what the OP is) a potential murderer just because he is a Nadal fanboy...dont you think that is going over the top??

I kinda enjoy the banter between the trolls in here, mostly dealing with tennis, but that I think goes over the line, and out of nowhere, especially in light of the recent events in the US, which have seriously affected many people.

Fair enough, and your concern has been noted.. I appreciate your up-frontness..

But I will ask that you explain to me the behaviour of a person that spends all his waking hours on an internet message board looking for fights to pick.. You gotta wonder about people like that, and in some way worry a little about their mental state? It is after all, just a tennis message board, and not a right of passage to greatness...

Attila the tennis Bum
06-17-2007, 08:26 AM
i thought this thread was about nadal switching to one hand backhand how come it went back to fed?

actually this post is about making fun of me. But thats ok...I kind of am honored.

Its shocking how my proposition has caused such commotion. You would have thought I would have said something really radical.

It just goes to show human nature. Most great ideas were laughed at by the majority.

Columbus thought the world was round and he was laughed at. I don;t think my proposition is near as radical but I cannot believe the commotion it has caused.

Fedace
06-17-2007, 08:32 AM
Nadal already has a very good 1-handed backhand slice so i have no clue what the purpose of this thread is.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-17-2007, 08:45 AM
Nadal already has a very good 1-handed backhand slice so i have no clue what the purpose of this thread is.


He really does. Good point. people ignore that he has that shot.

dukemunson
06-17-2007, 09:34 AM
Fair enough, and your concern has been noted.. I appreciate your up-frontness..

But I will ask that you explain to me the behaviour of a person that spends all his waking hours on an internet message board looking for fights to pick.. You gotta wonder about people like that, and in some way worry a little about their mental state? It is after all, just a tennis message board, and not a right of passage to greatness...

Your doing the same thing...with equally bizarre and outlandish posts. Atila, while making outragrageous points, is at least demonstrating a bit of humor...

VikingSamurai
06-17-2007, 01:55 PM
Oh, I have humour... Infact, I find it great that all you Nadal fanboys have a place to come and make love to each other, is kinda cool!;-)

As for your good self.. You have been on the boards for 5 minutes.. I have never had any dealings with you in the past, yet, because of one thread, you seem to think you understand me.. You have a gift!

stormholloway
06-17-2007, 01:56 PM
Anyone who hits a slice as its supposed to be hit hits it with one hand. When someone talks about a one handed backhand it's implied as the topspin variety. Otherwise they'll call it a slice backhand.

dukemunson
06-17-2007, 02:06 PM
Oh, I have humour... Infact, I find it great that all you Nadal fanboys have a place to come and make love to each other, is kinda cool!;-)

As for your good self.. You have been on the boards for 5 minutes.. I have never had any dealings with you in the past, yet, because of one thread, you seem to think you understand me.. You have a gift!

The gift is simple...read several of someone's post and in your case realize immedietely that that person knows absolutely nothing about tennis in any context. For some odd reason you seem to think you know what you are talking about, that second round loss in sectionals in the 18's giving you some sort of belief that you walked away from the game with some understanding and ability in it (though I am just taking that from your word as you come across as more of a 13 year old with no understanding of tennis then a 28 year old with no tennis)...

I personally dislike Nadal and while appreciative of Federer am certainly no fan of his either.

VikingSamurai
06-17-2007, 03:57 PM
The gift is simple...read several of someone's post and in your case realize immedietely that that person knows absolutely nothing about tennis in any context. For some odd reason you seem to think you know what you are talking about, that second round loss in sectionals in the 18's giving you some sort of belief that you walked away from the game with some understanding and ability in it (though I am just taking that from your word as you come across as more of a 13 year old with no understanding of tennis then a 28 year old with no tennis)...

I personally dislike Nadal and while appreciative of Federer am certainly no fan of his either.

See again, you have decided to make yet another smarmy remark, and as I have pointed out, simply have no knowledge of my playing past, nor what I do now.. You have a high opinion of yourself in that you feel free to make your dislike of other people known, yet I am still yet to see any evidence that you yourself have the right to judge others.. I didnt become a professional tennis player, and burnt out at 18 with injury and lack of desire. I am now 32, have a family, work a normal job, and enjoy tennis like all the other members on this board..

The point is, I simply dont have to defend myself to people who come into discussion threads and attack people, yet refuse to add their own wisdome in the process. Its easy to say things are dumb, and it is even easier to critisize. But to actually say anything constructive and intelligent seems to be a bit beyond your abilities.. It also opens you up to critisism if you yourself are deemed to say something wrong. And to be honest with you, you have shown with your stupid remarks, that you simply dont have the mental capability to except that kind of critisism..

If you want to continue on with this sillyness.. Then you will be met with a YAWN.. You are a fart that has started to turn into a turd!;)

dukemunson
06-17-2007, 04:41 PM
slice the ball like cricket...that's good humor...I actually appreciate your presence on the board...bizarre idiotic quotes are what drive and keep this thing. Keep it up...

anchorsteamer
06-17-2007, 04:49 PM
Haha, picking fights again Duke. I'm still ****ed about that line call, you know it was in

Nadal_Freak
06-17-2007, 04:50 PM
All I need to say is Vamos Rafa. He doesn't need to change anything. Just continue to improve the more he plays on grass.

VikingSamurai
06-17-2007, 05:50 PM
slice the ball like cricket...that's good humor...I actually appreciate your presence on the board...bizarre idiotic quotes are what drive and keep this thing. Keep it up...

Huh?

What country are you from?.. If you had any smarts left, and if you actually understood where I was coming from, you would understand that I was using spin bowling in cricket to talk about how a ball can be minipulated in order to change its trajectory and path.. The same principles can be applied to a tennis ball, except for the fact that you are not rolling a ball out of your hand, rather, you are using the racquet to cut the ball and generate the spin in that sense.. You really need to get some sunshine, and stop taking things so "matter-of-fact" you half witt..

Again, your post count is increasing, yet I am still yet to see any of your wisdom and advice.. ;) You are strting to show Troll tendancies my little old mate...

Mick
06-17-2007, 06:19 PM
Lendl had one of the best 1 hbh but it didn't help him winning Wimbledon.

On the other hand, Borg, Connors, Agassi, Ivanisevic, and Hewitt all got a 2hbh and they are all past Wimbledon champions.

dukemunson
06-17-2007, 06:23 PM
Huh?

What country are you from?.. If you had any smarts left, and if you actually understood where I was coming from, you would understand that I was using spin bowling in cricket to talk about how a ball can be minipulated in order to change its trajectory and path.. The same principles can be applied to a tennis ball, except for the fact that you are not rolling a ball out of your hand, rather, you are using the racquet to cut the ball and generate the spin in that sense.. You really need to get some sunshine, and stop taking things so "matter-of-fact" you half witt..

Again, your post count is increasing, yet I am still yet to see any of your wisdom and advice.. ;) You are strting to show Troll tendancies my little old mate...


Your logic does't translate to tennis...sorry mate...the same principles cant be applied. Slicing a ball so that it will spin back TOWARDS YOU cannot work in any level beyond the 3.5 mens league you play in. On clay Nadal or anyone in the top 1000 will hit a winner on it unless its a dropshot. I love how you accuse everyone who points out your ignorance as a troll...its quite amusing. But again I thank you...your lack of tennis knowledge combined with high post count is providing a good laugh.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-17-2007, 06:36 PM
I was watching a little of the match...nadal actually has a pretty good forehand slice as well. I was never aware of that before.

tennis_hand
06-17-2007, 06:44 PM
Nadal needs to become a right-hander in order to win Wimbledon.

stormholloway
06-17-2007, 07:03 PM
Nadal needs to become a woman in order to win Wimbledon.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-17-2007, 07:31 PM
Nadal needs to become a right-hander in order to win Wimbledon.

hey thats not a bad idea?:)....but he actually is a right hander!

VikingSamurai
06-17-2007, 08:45 PM
Your logic does't translate to tennis...sorry mate...the same principles cant be applied. Slicing a ball so that it will spin back TOWARDS YOU cannot work in any level beyond the 3.5 mens league you play in. On clay Nadal or anyone in the top 1000 will hit a winner on it unless its a dropshot. I love how you accuse everyone who points out your ignorance as a troll...its quite amusing. But again I thank you...your lack of tennis knowledge combined with high post count is providing a good laugh.

Who mentioned hitting a flat out winner using spin?.. I think you are having conversations with yourself and then think that it is me you are talking to when you come back to reality..

All I talked about was slicing a ball in different ways in order to get a different result.. You really are getting ahead of yourself here some what..

From what I can work out from your last response is that you cant (or dont know how) to hit spin or slice?.. To try and tell someone that it is impossible to do so (because you said) is a little bit silly.. You are fast to say that I have no tennis knowledge, but I am wondering what it is that you yourself have offered?..

When I play grass, I try to hit the ball flat and slice to keep the ball sitting low and to also skid through on my opponent..I always tried to out hit and out muscle my opponent.. When I play on clay, I slow my stroke down somewhat and work on the ball more, using different shots with various spin and angles (as well as) slicing the ball to break up my opponents rythem..How is that so hard for you to understand?

As for the Toll comment. Then what else do you say about a person that wants to critisize, but is still yet to provide, prove or add an alternative to what people have said.. I think I have asked you in the last 3 of my posts to share your wisdom (you obviously think you have it?), but instead of giving a solid response. You keep on with the drama..:D

baller
06-17-2007, 10:52 PM
Who mentioned hitting a flat out winner using spin?.. I think you are having conversations with yourself and then think that it is me you are talking to when you come back to reality..

All I talked about was slicing a ball in different ways in order to get a different result.. You really are getting ahead of yourself here some what..

From what I can work out from your last response is that you cant (or dont know how) to hit spin or slice?.. To try and tell someone that it is impossible to do so (because you said) is a little bit silly.. You are fast to say that I have no tennis knowledge, but I am wondering what it is that you yourself have offered?..

When I play grass, I try to hit the ball flat and slice to keep the ball sitting low and to also skid through on my opponent..I always tried to out hit and out muscle my opponent.. When I play on clay, I slow my stroke down somewhat and work on the ball more, using different shots with various spin and angles (as well as) slicing the ball to break up my opponents rythem..How is that so hard for you to understand?

As for the Toll comment. Then what else do you say about a person that wants to critisize, but is still yet to provide, prove or add an alternative to what people have said.. I think I have asked you in the last 3 of my posts to share your wisdom (you obviously think you have it?), but instead of giving a solid response. You keep on with the drama..:D

what he is saying, is that you are ********.

let me know if i can clarify anything else for you.

VikingSamurai
06-18-2007, 02:20 AM
what he is saying, is that you are ********.

let me know if i can clarify anything else for you.

What.. Are you his boyfriend now Mr 10 posts?;)

Ripper
06-18-2007, 07:29 AM
Nadal already has a very good 1-handed backhand slice so i have no clue what the purpose of this thread is.

Let's clarify a couple of things. First, the intention of this thread was just to prove a point; that the other thread suggesting Fed to switch to a two hand backhand was stupid. Well and ignorant. Second, nobody is talking about backhand slices. Oh and btw backhand slices are supposed to be done with one hand, regardless of how many you use for your backhand drive. There's so much ignorance on these threads. Goodbye.

nyaa
06-18-2007, 08:09 AM
Nadal's double handed backhand is obviously better than his single handed backhand otherwise he would be using a single handed backhand. Opposite for Federer.

baller
06-18-2007, 08:24 AM
What.. Are you his boyfriend now Mr 10 posts?;)

clever, i can see how you got 1200 quality posts now

sorry i dont judge someone's worth by postcount...but i understand its all you have to go on. since you would actually have to know something about the game to do otherwise.

keep posting to prove my point

dukemunson
06-18-2007, 08:41 AM
When I play on clay, I slow my stroke down somewhat and work on the ball more, using different shots with various spin and angles (as well as) slicing the ball to break up my opponents rythem..How is that so hard for you to understand?


It's not hard for me to understand...in fact it's the very reason I realize you know absolutely nothing about tennis. As i've dictated from the beggining your strategy is only workable against 3.5 level players or in the mens 65's senior nationals. It's not your fault, having obviousaly never played tennis at any sort of high level you think that since taking all the pace off the ball against the 63 year old with a new knee at your public courts works, it will work against Nadal. I don't doubt your logic and strategy works...keep on picking up those Men's B league titles with it...but realize it doesn't work at any sort of other level. I never said it wasn't possible to hit slices...I said that on clay it's a shot that only works every once in awhile (like the dropshot), and when used more then sparringly will do nothing more then put you on the defensive...

Pisolino227
06-18-2007, 08:56 AM
You're all idiots..........go outside and enjoy the summer.

dukemunson
06-18-2007, 09:28 AM
Haha, picking fights again Duke. I'm still ****ed about that line call, you know it was in

Still complaining about that, comon...Umpire saw it out...you'd have gotten smoked by Warburg next round anyways though, he owned you...

carol4832
06-18-2007, 11:42 AM
I hate these topics, Fed needs to develop this, Nadal needs to develop that. They're all quite pointless.

Rafa Needs to wear tighter pirate shorts, a bring up picking his butt, by 29%... if you check those stats at his next match and project it out.. he will win a slam before fed does !!!

VikingSamurai
06-18-2007, 01:54 PM
Still complaining about that, comon...Umpire saw it out...you'd have gotten smoked by Warburg next round anyways though, he owned you...

Well, doesn't look like I am the only one you have started trouble with.. Seems to be a theme with you eh?;)

VikingSamurai
06-18-2007, 01:56 PM
clever, i can see how you got 1200 quality posts now

sorry i dont judge someone's worth by postcount...but i understand its all you have to go on. since you would actually have to know something about the game to do otherwise.

keep posting to prove my point

I got them for having discussion with other members.. I also got them from joining in on more than just my own threads.. Some members I get along with, some I dont. Its the nature of the internet message board I guess.. You have been here for 11 posts now, and you are already starting in on people.. Speaks volumes for you..

anchorsteamer
06-18-2007, 03:37 PM
Still complaining about that, comon...Umpire saw it out...you'd have gotten smoked by Warburg next round anyways though, he owned you...

I still can't believe he hugged me the last time we played and congratulated me on how much better I was playing...unbelievable...string the rackets up mate, the tour is starting in Lithuania and I need a doubles partner. As for this message board, does that guy really think it's possible for Federer to switch from a one-hander to a two-hander?

Attila the tennis Bum
06-23-2007, 12:48 PM
You're all idiots..........go outside and enjoy the summer.

believe me wish I could. I am home with an injury. Bored out of my mind. Can't wait to hit the courts and stop wasting my time.

soggyramen
06-23-2007, 02:05 PM
I think he should also probably switch to a 90 sq inch. or less racquet...

hell why not switch to a squash racquet while he's at it

VikingSamurai
06-23-2007, 03:56 PM
What happened to the Fed thread?

dukemunson
06-23-2007, 04:12 PM
Yeah...what happened to the Fed thread? It may have had a bizarre premise (Fed switch to a 2 hander) but there was some good lively debate going on...the last posts were making fun of Rocket and Breakpoint, and were actually pretty good humor...

VikingSamurai
06-23-2007, 05:05 PM
Why do I get the feeling you had something to do with it? ;-)

baller
06-23-2007, 05:57 PM
i deleted it

dukemunson
06-23-2007, 06:18 PM
well thats too bad...the sabbatini graf comparison was really becoming comical...

BreakPoint
06-23-2007, 06:21 PM
well thats too bad...the sabbatini graf comparison was really becoming comical...
Oh yeah? Why? You have no answer? If you do, please explain it to the rest of us.

BreakPoint
06-23-2007, 06:23 PM
believe me wish I could. I am home with an injury. Bored out of my mind. Can't wait to hit the courts and stop wasting my time.

Really? I'm shocked! :roll:

anchorsteamer
06-23-2007, 10:21 PM
Oh yeah? Why? You have no answer? If you do, please explain it to the rest of us.

Your comparing what Graf did to Sabatini to Federer vs. Nadal...graf-sabbatini... federer-nadal. Two people who anyone in the Pac-10 or the SEC playing top 4 could beat on any surface 9 out of 10 times...ATP world #1 and #2. Please tell me this was joke...a flippant comment that you decided to run with to get some responses and additions to your post count...anything other then you being serious. Nadal would beat Graf 6-0, 6-0, 6-1, 6-0, 6-1 (the games lost being a combination of bordome, several bad let chords and a rough game in which Nadal double faulted 3 times and went for a between the legs winner). Your making the argument that the slice can work...I understand that. You've seen it work in the juniors, you've seen it work at your club tournament and you saw Steffi Graf exploit a bunch of one dimensional women and you think it will work on the ATP. Stop posting so much and go watch some real tennis...

BreakPoint
06-23-2007, 10:36 PM
Your comparing what Graf did to Sabatini to Federer vs. Nadal...
NO, I'M NOT!!!!! Where the heck did you get that idea from? Did you even read all 500 posts from that other thread?

I was comparing using slice on clay versus on hardcourts. Atilla claimed in dozens of posts that slicing by anybody on clay is useless and does not work and that hitting topspin is the only way anyone can win on clay. I was showing him that that's not true by pointing out that Graf won 6 French Opens by slicing 100% of her backhands but that Sabatini never even as far as made it to a final with all of her massive topspin. Atilla also claimed that slicing only works on hardcourt but not on clay. So I asked him to also explain why Graf lost to Sabatini in the '90 US Open final in straight sets on fast hardcourts, given Graf's tremendous success at the French with her slice and Sabatini's utter failure at the French with her topspin.

IT HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH FEDERER AND NADAL. NOT IN ANY OF MY POSTS DID I MENTION THE NAMES FEDERER NOR NADAL ALONG WITH GRAF OR SABATINI.

END OF STORY!

anchorsteamer
06-23-2007, 10:48 PM
While Atila made the idiotic comment about Fed switching to a 2-hander, the obvious inference on his point about the slice was as it pertains to the ATP. Of course slice can and will work in some situations...but the point of the argument (that im amazed you missed) was that it cant work at this level. If someone says that lob volleys doesn't work are you going to counter with the match you played in high school tennis in which lobs worked every time...or the senior mens match in which it was used succesfully on 12 out of 14 occassions...or the time Davenport got bored in her match and torched Meilen Tu with the volley lob 6 straight points? I'm just bummed the other thread got deleted...you and Rocket were battling for supremecy of worthless comments. Stop posting and go watch some real tennis...

anchorsteamer
06-23-2007, 10:51 PM
slice is also exponentially more effective on hard courts then clay courts...were you serious when you brought up the sabbatini-graf results from the french and the US Open? I'm convinced you must have been joking...and I agree...that's outstanding humor...

BreakPoint
06-24-2007, 12:12 AM
While Atila made the idiotic comment about Fed switching to a 2-hander, the obvious inference on his point about the slice was as it pertains to the ATP. Of course slice can and will work in some situations...but the point of the argument (that im amazed you missed) was that it cant work at this level. If someone says that lob volleys doesn't work are you going to counter with the match you played in high school tennis in which lobs worked every time...or the senior mens match in which it was used succesfully on 12 out of 14 occassions...or the time Davenport got bored in her match and torched Meilen Tu with the volley lob 6 straight points? I'm just bummed the other thread got deleted...you and Rocket were battling for supremecy of worthless comments. Stop posting and go watch some real tennis...
Then please explain why just about every time Federer sliced in the FO final he won the point.

Attilia was talking about slicing on clay, period. By anyone at any time. He claimed that NO ONE AT ANY LEVEL can effectively slice on clay, period.

Please also explain how Graf won 6 French Opens by slicing 100% of her backhands while Sabatini never even made it to a FO final with all her topspin off of both sides if topspin is the only thing that works on clay and slices never work on clay? :confused: I still have yet to see an explaination from you.

Oh, and lobs do work at this level. Just ask Lleyton Hewitt.

BTW, how would you know slices and lobs do not work at this level? Do you play at this level and have tried it yourself?

BreakPoint
06-24-2007, 12:18 AM
slice is also exponentially more effective on hard courts then clay courts...were you serious when you brought up the sabbatini-graf results from the french and the US Open? I'm convinced you must have been joking...and I agree...that's outstanding humor...
If slicing doesn't work on clay then please explain how Ken Rosewall won 10 French titles (including before the open era), including 7 straight times, by slicing 100% of his backhands. And 5 of those wins were against Rod Laver (4 straight times) in the finals even with all of Laver's topspin?

VikingSamurai
06-24-2007, 01:48 AM
Umm, they cant, and they wont.. These guys have been telling everyone that opens their mouth's that they cant play tennis and dont know what they are talking about, yet they never add anything in exchange that will even back up their statements..

It seems that if you even attempt to think outside of the box, you are told to go back to your public courts and leave them to the job of being wanna be tennis professionals (although it is not that fact I have a problem with (more power to you). Its the attitude and disrespect for the other members on this board that I cant stand).. I might have my disagreement with people. But I never say that I am anything that I am not, and dont try to pass my knowledge off as gospel.. We all have brains, and some people actually know how to use them..

You are just wasting your time with these people, and as for Atilla... Sheeesh...

Attila the tennis Bum
06-24-2007, 03:22 AM
Anchor,

Give it up. he is just not worth it. There is no hope.

VikingSamurai
06-24-2007, 05:19 AM
Anchor,

Give it up. he is just not worth it. There is no hope.

How long before this troll thread gets closed down aswell?

anchorsteamer
06-24-2007, 06:51 AM
If slicing doesn't work on clay then please explain how Ken Rosewall won 10 French titles (including before the open era), including 7 straight times, by slicing 100% of his backhands. And 5 of those wins were against Rod Laver (4 straight times) in the finals even with all of Laver's topspin?

Your posts answer themselves. You are saying that since something was effective 30 years ago and on the WTA tour, it should and would be effective at the finals of the French Open...Do you not realize how amazingly naive that is. How can you make that connection? The game has obviousaly changed? 85 MPH fastballs worked 30 years ago and in softball...would they still work or has the game changed? Your logic would dictate that since continental forehands used to work and win titles...they obviousaly must work now. What you missed about the lob comment was the word that preceded it, "volley" as in "volley lobs are not effective at this level as a routine shot". Again I don't mean to be harsh, you just have no concept of the speed of the game...

anchorsteamer
06-24-2007, 06:53 AM
Umm, they cant, and they wont.. These guys have been telling everyone that opens their mouth's that they cant play tennis and dont know what they are talking about, yet they never add anything in exchange that will even back up their statements..

It seems that if you even attempt to think outside of the box, you are told to go back to your public courts and leave them to the job of being wanna be tennis professionals (although it is not that fact I have a problem with (more power to you). Its the attitude and disrespect for the other members on this board that I cant stand).. I might have my disagreement with people. But I never say that I am anything that I am not, and dont try to pass my knowledge off as gospel.. We all have brains, and some people actually know how to use them..

You are just wasting your time with these people, and as for Atilla... Sheeesh...

Your not thinking outside the box Chris...your thinking in the box but with a 40 years delay (*womens tennis can be substituted for "40 year delay" in this instance as well).

BreakPoint
06-24-2007, 10:58 AM
Your posts answer themselves. You are saying that since something was effective 30 years ago and on the WTA tour, it should and would be effective at the finals of the French Open...Do you not realize how amazingly naive that is. How can you make that connection? The game has obviousaly changed? 85 MPH fastballs worked 30 years ago and in softball...would they still work or has the game changed? Your logic would dictate that since continental forehands used to work and win titles...they obviousaly must work now. What you missed about the lob comment was the word that preceded it, "volley" as in "volley lobs are not effective at this level as a routine shot". Again I don't mean to be harsh, you just have no concept of the speed of the game...
So you're admitting that slices do indeed work on clay. I'm not talking about the ATP Tour nor Federer nor Nadal. I'm talking about anybody hitting slices on clay. Attila claimed that slicing doesn't work for anybody at any level.

And, yes, I did see the word "volley" and yes, Hewitt along with many other pros hit lob volleys with great success. I've seen it many times. Oh, BTW, it's "lob volley", NOT "volley lob", which shows how little you know about tennis.

BTW, how would you know what works and doesn't work today on the ATP Tour? Do you play on the ATP Tour today? Because the only way you could possibly know for sure is if you've tried these shots/grips yourself against that level of competition. So please give us your name so we can look up your ATP ranking.

Lastly, what worked 30 years ago doesn't work today? Tell that to Federer. He plays a classic all court game with classic strokes just like Laver did, not just 30 years ago, but 40 years ago. So I guess Federer's 40-year old classic style doesn't work today, huh? It must be a miracle that he managed to win 10 of the last 15 Grand Slams then. Boy, I wish I possessed a game that doesn't work anymore, either.

anchorsteamer
06-24-2007, 12:52 PM
Inspite of strong evidence to the contrary I'm hesitant to call you the least intelligent poster on this site...I probably haven't been here long enough to truly get an accurate view on this, but you are certainly in the early running.

1) Lob Volley, volley lob...it's the exact same thing, are you serious with your conviction in one being right and not the other? Of course it's been used effectively every once in awhile, like the slice on clay...it's a changeup shot.

2) Any and all shots can obviously work on some level. This obvious and redundant...A player hitting a one handed forehand off both sides can work in the 3.0 level...underhand serving can win matches in high school tennis...slicing on clay every time can work on the womens tour and 40 years ago...

3) There certainly are better authorities then me but I'm currently top 1000 in the world and played Div. 1 college tennis...I'm thinking that counts for more then what credentials your running with these days (12,000+ ignorant and useless posts don't count as a credential either).

4) You construed my statement that "what worked 40 years ago, can't work now" as meaning Federer plays an all-court game like Laver and as such that can't work? Examine that comment again...even Chris in Japan will appreciate that humor. Had I said the game of football has changed in the last 40 years ago and wouldn't work anymore, would you counter that the Packers used both the pass and rush attack back in the 60's just like the Colts of 2006 so they opbviousaly did the same thing and the 60's Packers would still be effective. Games don't change? What does Lavers game have to do with Federer in any context anyway though? They both use (used) classic all court strokes and games so what worked for Laver would work for Federer? Please continue posting, you are providing some fantastic unintentional humor...

VikingSamurai
06-24-2007, 01:39 PM
Your not thinking outside the box Chris...your thinking in the box but with a 40 years delay (*womens tennis can be substituted for "40 year delay" in this instance as well).

Is that right.. I would pay money to watch Henin kick your butt..;)

dukemunson
06-24-2007, 01:49 PM
My old friend Chris. Heres the thing Chris, you cant compare womens and mens tennis, its simply not fair. There are are at least 2000-3000 men in the world who would beat Henin 4 out of 5 times. It's a different sport and speed, which is perhaps one of the reasons you, Rocket and Breakpoint dont understand tennis...

dukemunson
06-24-2007, 01:52 PM
Steamer-

it got deleted but Breakpoint may be right about only putting that comment towards Atila, though I certainly agree his follow-ups have rather succinctly shown his tennis knowledge (lack thereof in this case). We playing SB in 2 weeks?

VikingSamurai
06-24-2007, 02:14 PM
My old friend Chris. Heres the thing Chris, you cant compare womens and mens tennis, its simply not fair. There are are at least 2000-3000 men in the world who would beat Henin 4 out of 5 times. It's a different sport and speed, which is perhaps one of the reasons you, Rocket and Breakpoint dont understand tennis...

I am not saying that it isnt different.. Rather, I like to look at the character of a player/person, and so regardless of man or woman. There is a reason she is #1, and you guys are/were in the 1000's.. (I never got that high admittedly. But I am not telling anyone that I did when I voice my opinion either..;)

So, a little more time practicing, and a little less time putting people in their place might be needed me thinks? Otherwise, give names, and we can all see how you really good you are/ was.. I am all for supporting up and comers..:D

dukemunson
06-24-2007, 02:24 PM
Hope this doesn't constitute stalking...

It's a no-win...someone repeatedly questions your knowledge of the game. Do you answer there repeated questions of how good you are or do you ignore it. Top 1000 in tennis is nothing, or at least certainly nothing to brag about, but it does mean you've played guys in the top 200-300 and have some added insight into the game that someone doesn't have from simply sitting around watching. My tennis is done beyond picking up a few paychecks here and there in the Opens. Steamer is still living the dream but he's got a game that can peak at 500...sorry mate...you should have worked on that backhand...

VikingSamurai
06-24-2007, 03:53 PM
Being top 1000 isnt a poor effort at all, considering the millions of people that play.. You talk of it like it is something anyone can do.. Your bravado is amazing..

Ha ha ha stalking you.... :-)

Its uncomfortable when the same member keeps replying to you isnt it?.. Kinda felt that way in the last thread when you kept banging on about my "silly" slice comment.. You made a point of telling me everytime you posted!. Infact, I was starting to get the feeling that you had it in for me?

Funny how you have an issue now that I am the one doing the replying to your comments..;-)

Edit: As for your knowledge.. You havnt shown me any instance whereby you are any smarter on a tennis court than anyone else that has posted.. In my opinion, there is nothing that has been questioned?. You simply havnt offered anything other than critisism and silly smarmy comments ....

BreakPoint
06-24-2007, 05:07 PM
Inspite of strong evidence to the contrary I'm hesitant to call you the least intelligent poster on this site...I probably haven't been here long enough to truly get an accurate view on this, but you are certainly in the early running.
Sorry, but you would be wrong. Scoring in the top 2% in the nation (USA) on the graduate school admissions tests and earning multiple Ivy League degrees, including in engineering, would indicate otherwise.

1) Lob Volley, volley lob...it's the exact same thing, are you serious with your conviction in one being right and not the other? Of course it's been used effectively every once in awhile, like the slice on clay...it's a changeup shot.
You must be the "unintelligent" one if you think I was advocating that the pros should hit a lob volley on EVERY single shot. How often does one even get the opportunity to even try a lob volley in singles? The only time anyone would try it is when both players are at net and how often does that ever even happen these days? Once a match, if that?

And it's "lob volley", NOT "volley lob". In my over 30 years of playing tennis I have NEVER heard anyone call it a "volley lob".

2) Any and all shots can obviously work on some level. This obvious and redundant...A player hitting a one handed forehand off both sides can work in the 3.0 level...underhand serving can win matches in high school tennis...slicing on clay every time can work on the womens tour and 40 years ago...
So you agree with me and disagree with Attila then. I've been saying that slicing can work at some levels on clay, while he's been claiming that slicing does not work for anyone at any level on clay. And it can work for Federer as well as proven by what happened almost every time he sliced in the FO final - he won the point. Of course, no one here is saying that he should slcice 100% of the time like Graf or Rosewall. I'm saying that if he sliced only less than 5% of his backhands, perhaps he can increase that to around 15% or so.

BTW, underhand serves CAN win matches even at the pro level. Just ask either Michael Chang or Ivan Lendl. ;)

3) There certainly are better authorities then me but I'm currently top 1000 in the world and played Div. 1 college tennis...I'm thinking that counts for more then what credentials your running with these days (12,000+ ignorant and useless posts don't count as a credential either).
Do you hit a 1HBH or a 2HBH? Most 2HBH players don't like to slice because it gives their opponents a clear signal they're going to slice as soon as they let go with their other hand. It's much easier for 1HBH players to disguise backhand slices.

4) You construed my statement that "what worked 40 years ago, can't work now" as meaning Federer plays an all-court game like Laver and as such that can't work? Examine that comment again...even Chris in Japan will appreciate that humor. Had I said the game of football has changed in the last 40 years ago and wouldn't work anymore, would you counter that the Packers used both the pass and rush attack back in the 60's just like the Colts of 2006 so they opbviousaly did the same thing and the 60's Packers would still be effective. Games don't change? What does Lavers game have to do with Federer in any context anyway though? They both use (used) classic all court strokes and games so what worked for Laver would work for Federer? Please continue posting, you are providing some fantastic unintentional humor...
Yes, the all-court game worked for Laver 40 years ago and it still works for Federer today. You have yet to explain why an all-court game and classic strokes, like Federer's and Laver's, will not work today.

And, yes, I would counter that a pass and rush attack would still work today as it did 40 years ago, and it has.

Rodditha
06-24-2007, 05:26 PM
Wether Nadal developps a one hander he will never win wimbledon because he is a top spin m......:D :p
Seriously he don't have the grass game even though he is trying to develop it.

Mahboob Khan
06-24-2007, 10:39 PM
In this part of the world there is saying, "you don't need enemies if you have stupid friends".

You guys are out to destroy Federer's and Nadal's careers! Federer needs to develop double-handed BH if he wants to win French, and Nadal needs to develop 1-handed BH if he wants to win Wimbledon! I am just holding my head!

Attila the tennis Bum
06-25-2007, 05:33 AM
In this part of the world there is saying, "you don't need enemies if you have stupid friends".

You guys are out to destroy Federer's and Nadal's careers! Federer needs to develop double-handed BH if he wants to win French, and Nadal needs to develop 1-handed BH if he wants to win Wimbledon! I am just holding my head!


Hey...I only said my opinion. I didnt say it was the right one and I see other sides of the argument.

But to actually have a debate over whether the slice is more effective on clay or hardcourts is just a joke. Thats not opinion...thats basic facts.

Or to have a debate over whether "wood" is less forgiving than "graphite" is another fact....and a very basic one.

This is really sad. This board is a joke.

anchorsteamer
06-25-2007, 07:17 AM
Sorry, but you would be wrong. Scoring in the top 2% in the nation (USA) on the graduate school admissions tests and earning multiple Ivy League degrees, including in engineering, would indicate otherwise.

You must be the "unintelligent" one if you think I was advocating that the pros should hit a lob volley on EVERY single shot. How often does one even get the opportunity to even try a lob volley in singles? The only time anyone would try it is when both players are at net and how often does that ever even happen these days? Once a match, if that?

And it's "lob volley", NOT "volley lob". In my over 30 years of playing tennis I have NEVER heard anyone call it a "volley lob".

So you agree with me and disagree with Attila then. I've been saying that slicing can work at some levels on clay, while he's been claiming that slicing does not work for anyone at any level on clay. And it can work for Federer as well as proven by what happened almost every time he sliced in the FO final - he won the point. Of course, no one here is saying that he should slcice 100% of the time like Graf or Rosewall. I'm saying that if he sliced only less than 5% of his backhands, perhaps he can increase that to around 15% or so.

BTW, underhand serves CAN win matches even at the pro level. Just ask either Michael Chang or Ivan Lendl. ;)

Do you hit a 1HBH or a 2HBH? Most 2HBH players don't like to slice because it gives their opponents a clear signal they're going to slice as soon as they let go with their other hand. It's much easier for 1HBH players to disguise backhand slices.

Yes, the all-court game worked for Laver 40 years ago and it still works for Federer today. You have yet to explain why an all-court game and classic strokes, like Federer's and Laver's, will not work today.

And, yes, I would counter that a pass and rush attack would still work today as it did 40 years ago, and it has.

Arguing about what to call the "lob volley" is crazy...out here in California you here both with equal regularity (though regularity is a stretch of the word as its not a shot discussed or attempted very well at all)...

The all-court game (like the game style of 40 years ago) will still work in the context of being able to hit every shot well (or in the context of football being able to effectively both pass and rush). However the important factor here is the speed. Just because slice worked in the context of an all-court game 40 years ago, doesn't mean it will work as well in an all-court game now the speed has changed (in football, the evolution of the blitz and speed of linebacker has changed the game).

The slice can work on clay, thats been proven...but that being said its not a particulalry effective shot on clay, or a shot you want to hit in any context beyond that of a change-up. I think Federer's slice worked because he used it as a changeup...using it more would simply diminish it's value.

The Chang underhand serve example is of course the exception to the rule...it worked but we can all accept, understand and agree that it would not work on a consistent basis at that level.

I have a 2-HB, not a very good one though so I actually slice it a lot as most guys in the futures aren't good enough to effectively attack or exploit it.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 07:57 AM
Arguing about what to call the "lob volley" is crazy...out here in California you here both with equal regularity (though regularity is a stretch of the word as its not a shot discussed or attempted very well at all)...

The all-court game (like the game style of 40 years ago) will still work in the context of being able to hit every shot well (or in the context of football being able to effectively both pass and rush). However the important factor here is the speed. Just because slice worked in the context of an all-court game 40 years ago, doesn't mean it will work as well in an all-court game now the speed has changed (in football, the evolution of the blitz and speed of linebacker has changed the game).

The slice can work on clay, thats been proven...but that being said its not a particulalry effective shot on clay, or a shot you want to hit in any context beyond that of a change-up. I think Federer's slice worked because he used it as a changeup...using it more would simply diminish it's value.

The Chang underhand serve example is of course the exception to the rule...it worked but we can all accept, understand and agree that it would not work on a consistent basis at that level.

I have a 2-HB, not a very good one though so I actually slice it a lot as most guys in the futures aren't good enough to effectively attack or exploit it.
Wait, so you actually do slice a lot and agree that it works because your opponents have trouble attacking or exploiting it? So what's the problem? That's what I've been saying all along. Have you played guys in the Top 20 before and tried slicing? If not, how would you know it wouldn't work against them? Federer slices all the time on all surfaces (except hardly at all in the FO final for whatever reason) and seems to win a heck of a lot of matches against the Top 20 doing it. And Gonzo's slice backhand got him to the AO final earlier this year. In fact, on ESPN they just said during the Gonzo-Ginepri 1st round match this morning that Ginepri has admitted that Gonzi's slice backhand gives him all sorts of trouble, especially when hit to his 2HBH. I've played on hardcourts, clay and grass, and I've always found that slicing to opponents' 2HBH's works particularly well as most guys with 2HBH's prefer to hit the ball higher up so they like opponents that give them nice kicking topspin that bounce right up to their strike zones.

And I actually think the speed of the game today is exactly why the slice can still work. Everyone is so used to the fast pace and the massive topspin, that a lot of younger guys don't know what to do with a slower, low bouncing slice. It gives them all sorts of fits as it disrupts their rhythm. They've hit millions of topspin balls but not nearly as many slices so it's something they're not quite as comfortable with. In fact, I just watched Hingis come back from 2 match points down in the 2nd set to win her match using lots of slice and drop shots. And she broke serve to stay in the match with what? You guessed it - a lob volley. BTW, I also live in California and I have never heard anyone call it a "volley lob". Perhaps it's because it's so rarely used that many people you play with don't know what to call it?

BTW, the underhand serve can work at lower levels as there's really not a whole lot you can do to return those underhand serves that have no pace and just plops over the net and lands within 1 or 2 feet of the net. I played a guy recently that did a lot of that and it was hard to get aggressive on the returns.

BTW, since you admit your 2HBH is not very good, have you considered switching to a 1HBH? Have you read this article before?
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/french/2005-05-31-one-handed-backhands_x.htm

anchorsteamer
06-25-2007, 08:41 AM
Wait, so you actually do slice a lot and agree that it works because your opponents have trouble attacking or exploiting it? So what's the problem? That's what I've been saying all along. Have you played guys in the Top 20 before and tried slicing? If not, how would you know it wouldn't work against them? Federer slices all the time on all surfaces (except hardly at all in the FO final for whatever reason) and seems to win a heck of a lot of matches against the Top 20 doing it. And Gonzo's slice backhand got him to the AO final earlier this year. In fact, on ESPN they just said during the Gonzo-Ginepri 1st round match this morning that Ginepri has admitted that Gonzi's slice backhand gives him all sorts of trouble, especially when hit to his 2HBH. I've played on hardcourts, clay and grass, and I've always found that slicing to opponents' 2HBH's works particularly well as most guys with 2HBH's prefer to hit the ball higher up so they like opponents that give them nice kicking topspin that bounce right up to their strike zones.

And I actually think the speed of the game today is exactly why the slice can still work. Everyone is so used to the fast pace and the massive topspin, that a lot of younger guys don't know what to do with a slower, low bouncing slice. It gives them all sorts of fits as it disrupts their rhythm. They've hit millions of topspin balls but not nearly as many slices so it's something they're not quite as comfortable with. In fact, I just watched Hingis come back from 2 match points down in the 2nd set to win her match using lots of slice and drop shots. And she broke serve to stay in the match with what? You guessed it - a lob volley. BTW, I also live in California and I have never heard anyone call it a "volley lob". Perhaps it's because it's so rarely used that many people you play with don't know what to call it?

BTW, the underhand serve can work at lower levels as there's really not a whole lot you can do to return those underhand serves that have no pace and just plops over the net and lands within 1 or 2 feet of the net. I played a guy recently that did a lot of that and it was hard to get aggressive on the returns.

BTW, since you admit your 2HBH is not very good, have you considered switching to a 1HBH? Have you read this article before?
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/french/2005-05-31-one-handed-backhands_x.htm


Two problems.

1) While I am not Federer, this whole thread started (or gained steam) in attacking the implausibility of switching from a one-hander to a two-hander at this stage of a career. It's completely unrealistic and crazy...and is equally so in the opposite direction (proposing that someone who is playing a high level switch from a 2-hb to a 1-hb...it just isn't done). Sampras is a popular person to note as having switched, but he did it at 13...it's really really really impossibly unrealistic...I just need to stick with the two-hander on returns, use the slice when possible and avoid the red dirt as much as possible (which is a good idea additionally as my clay court experience in the passed is random futures in the summer and once a year making the trek over to Clay Court nationals in Kentucky or Florida or Maryland to battle a bunch of other Americans who had no idea what they were doing on the surface...)

2) The problem with your analagies are that you are using examples of slice on hard and grass court, where it is a spectacularly effective shot. On clay however, the best part of the slice is negated...it doesn't stay low, instead slowly bouncing up directly into a person's strike zone. I can't emphasize the importance of slicing on hard, grass or carpet enough as it's a shot that many younger guys don't know what to do with (their not comfortable coming into the net off any ball thats not high enough to step into with top spin and hit down on). Clay is the exception though...the ball no longer skids and stays low, it's bite is lost on the bounce which then sends the ball higher then hard or grass meaning all of a sudden a low penetrating slice on hard is now a waist high ball on dirt. It obviousaly still has a place but it's effectiveness on clay is exponentially decreased.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 09:11 AM
Two problems.

1) While I am not Federer, this whole thread started (or gained steam) in attacking the implausibility of switching from a one-hander to a two-hander at this stage of a career. It's completely unrealistic and crazy...and is equally so in the opposite direction (proposing that someone who is playing a high level switch from a 2-hb to a 1-hb...it just isn't done). Sampras is a popular person to note as having switched, but he did it at 13...it's really really really impossibly unrealistic...I just need to stick with the two-hander on returns, use the slice when possible and avoid the red dirt as much as possible (which is a good idea additionally as my clay court experience in the passed is random futures in the summer and once a year making the trek over to Clay Court nationals in Kentucky or Florida or Maryland to battle a bunch of other Americans who had no idea what they were doing on the surface...)

2) The problem with your analagies are that you are using examples of slice on hard and grass court, where it is a spectacularly effective shot. On clay however, the best part of the slice is negated...it doesn't stay low, instead slowly bouncing up directly into a person's strike zone. I can't emphasize the importance of slicing on hard, grass or carpet enough as it's a shot that many younger guys don't know what to do with (their not comfortable coming into the net off any ball thats not high enough to step into with top spin and hit down on). Clay is the exception though...the ball no longer skids and stays low, it's bite is lost on the bounce which then sends the ball higher then hard or grass meaning all of a sudden a low penetrating slice on hard is now a waist high ball on dirt. It obviousaly still has a place but it's effectiveness on clay is exponentially decreased.

I understand, but I was more asking if you have EVER considered switching to a 1HBH, as in when you were younger, as I'm assuming that your 2HBH has always been weak.

I agree that switching from a 2HBH to a 1HBH or vise versa at the pro level doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but I think the degree that it doesn't make sense also depends on how good your 2HBH or 1HBH currently is. For example, I think it's ludicrous for Federer to switch to a 2HBH because he has one of the best 1HBH's in the game. But if you say that you have a poor 2HBH, and I don't know how poor that really is, I guess the thought of switching would depend on how much worse off you think you'll be with a 1HBH.

Yes, I agree that a slice is not going to skid nor stay as low on clay as on grass or hardcourts, but it's still going to bounce lower than a heavy topspin shot will, right? That in itself, along with the slower pace of a slice, especially the way it floats and its different trajectory, can be enough to disrupt an opponent's rhythm. We all know Nadal loves to return opponents' high kicking topspin shots and can do it all day long and hardly ever miss. There are a lot of guys out there like this, but of course, not as consistent nor as good as Nadal is. Giving them a change-up every 4 or 5 shots will keep them on their toes and make them think instead of allowing them to get into the groove of just mindless baseline bashing of topspin shots.

It sounds like if you're slicing your backhand the majority of the time it may not be as effective for you as if you were able to mix in topspin and flat backhands along with the slices. It doesn't sound to me like you're doing that if your only using 2 hands on returns and slicing most of your groundies with 1 hand. Myself, I mix in a healthy dose of slice with my topspin and flat 1HBH's. It's rare that I would hit the same backhand more than twice in a row as I don't want my opponent to get into a groove.

BTW, I also think how well your slice works on clay depends on how good it is, too. When Federer slices on clay, the ball seems to stay pretty low. A few times Nadal couldn't even touch the ball as it didn't bounce much at all and a few other times Nadal netted the return due to the low bounce and his need to change his footwork and step in to hit the ball rather than hit it from his comfort zone 10 feet behind the baseline.

anchorsteamer
06-25-2007, 11:04 AM
I believe the effectiveness of Federers slice on clay to be contingent upon it being used as a change-of-pace...a shot used every once in awhile to "catch" Nadal in a groove and disrupt it. Were Federer to use it more often it's effectiveness would be lost, there is a definitive reason he is not using it very much. This point has been ignored for awhile (and actually argued the other direction) but the thing is Federer had the right gameplan...he just didn't execute it. He had 17 breakpoints and 40 unforced errors on the forehand side. You can Nadal caused a lot of the errors but 1 for 17 on break points...that has infinetely less to do with a gameplan then with how he was doing mentally that day.

I obviousaly haven't played Nadal, but I have played a lot of poor man Nadal clones in Eastern Europe on the dirt and the problem with the slice is that a good player can step in on the ball as it hangs up and punish you...thus the reason the best player in the world (arguably ever) does not slice much against Nadal...he realizes that in so doing he is basically handing control of the point over Nadal...something he obviuosaly doesnt want to do...

I did try switching to a 1-HB but found myself serving at Sectionals down 2 breaks in the first set and that was that...we abondoned the one-hander and resigned ourselves to a rather stiff backhand in which I am infinitely more comfortable slicing.

Attila the tennis Bum
06-25-2007, 01:20 PM
Arguing about what to call the "lob volley" is crazy...out here in California you here both with equal regularity (though regularity is a stretch of the word as its not a shot discussed or attempted very well at all)...

The all-court game (like the game style of 40 years ago) will still work in the context of being able to hit every shot well (or in the context of football being able to effectively both pass and rush). However the important factor here is the speed. Just because slice worked in the context of an all-court game 40 years ago, doesn't mean it will work as well in an all-court game now the speed has changed (in football, the evolution of the blitz and speed of linebacker has changed the game).

The slice can work on clay, thats been proven...but that being said its not a particulalry effective shot on clay, or a shot you want to hit in any context beyond that of a change-up. I think Federer's slice worked because he used it as a changeup...using it more would simply diminish it's value.

The Chang underhand serve example is of course the exception to the rule...it worked but we can all accept, understand and agree that it would not work on a consistent basis at that level.

I have a 2-HB, not a very good one though so I actually slice it a lot as most guys in the futures aren't good enough to effectively attack or exploit it.

Federer slice worked when he hit it inside the baseline. They did absolutely nothing when he was behind the baseline and dealing with high topspin. In those instances the ball landed short and Nadal crushed it.

irregardless...slice obviously is more effective on a hard court. To suggest otherwise as BP has done is simply naive.

rocket
06-25-2007, 02:27 PM
I'm just bummed the other thread got deleted...you and Rocket were battling for supremecy of worthless comments. Stop posting and go watch some real tennis...

There's no weak shot in tennis, but there's poor execution. If your execution is poor, don't blame the stroke. Stop pretending you know it all and go practice more.

dukemunson
06-25-2007, 02:36 PM
Outstanding, Rocket is back on this thread...there hadn't been much that was bizarre or completely irrelevant since you left, welcome back...

rocket
06-25-2007, 02:37 PM
My old friend Chris. Heres the thing Chris, you cant compare womens and mens tennis, its simply not fair. There are are at least 2000-3000 men in the world who would beat Henin 4 out of 5 times. It's a different sport and speed, which is perhaps one of the reasons you, Rocket and Breakpoint dont understand tennis...

Ya, speed. Riiiight. Those 2000-3000 men of yours can't even return Serena's serve, and who whooped Serena at the last RG?

Roddick has the fastest serve on earth. He also has a scary forehand, but hey, how come he got broken left & right against Murray and other 'less powerful' players? Could it be that his game's become too one-dimensional & predictable?

You just make things up as you go along don't you, Mr armchair-sportsman?

rocket
06-25-2007, 02:43 PM
Outstanding, Rocket is back on this thread...there hadn't been much that was bizarre or completely irrelevant since you left, welcome back...

What's been bizarre is that you, the Steamer guy & Attila the dble-hander study tennis from a TV set & come in here and talk crap all day long. Do you actually play tennis?

dukemunson
06-25-2007, 02:46 PM
Ya, speed. Riiiight. Those 2000-3000 men of yours can't even return Serena's serve, and who whooped Serena at the last RG?

Roddick has the fastest serve on earth. He also has a scary forehand, but hey, how come he got broken left & right against Murray and other 'less powerful' players? Could it be that his game's become too one-dimensional & predictable?

You just make things up as you go along don't you, Mr armchair-sportsman?

No I actually played a high level of tennis and have some degree of knowledge towards what I'm talking about. To be perfectly honest I actually think the number is higher (3000-4000) but decided to keep it conservative. Go watch some mens college tennis...there are hundreds of guys serving harder then Serena. It's a different sport, played at a speed you dont understand. Roddick is 5 in the world, whats your point? He'd beat Serena 6-0 or 6-1 every set they'd ever play...3-5 in the world for the better part of 3 years is predictable and one-dimensional huh...wow...interesting analysis...

rocket
06-25-2007, 03:01 PM
No I actually played a high level of tennis and have some degree of knowledge towards what I'm talking about. To be perfectly honest I actually think the number is higher (3000-4000) but decided to keep it conservative. Go watch some mens college tennis...there are hundreds of guys serving harder then Serena. It's a different sport, played at a speed you dont understand.

Ya Professor, sure. Since you love hugging your TV set, check your her 1st serve speed & compare it to the 3000-4000 guys of yours. Now, take into consideration placement & spin. Can you do that?

Roddick is 5 in the world, whats your point? He'd beat Serena 6-0 or 6-1 every set they'd ever play...3-5 in the world for the better part of 3 years is predictable and one-dimensional huh...wow...interesting analysis...

The point is (which you missed, as usual), if you keep hitting the ball with the same velocity, direction & spin all day long, your opponents will figure out your game soon enough. Did your "high level tennis" teach you anything about change-up?

Hey, here's an advice for you: go watch the two best players in the world, come back & tell me how they win points. ;)

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 03:14 PM
I believe the effectiveness of Federers slice on clay to be contingent upon it being used as a change-of-pace...a shot used every once in awhile to "catch" Nadal in a groove and disrupt it. Were Federer to use it more often it's effectiveness would be lost, there is a definitive reason he is not using it very much.
I agree and understand that the change of pace of the slice helps Federer to disrupt Nadal. However, I was also referring to how Federer's slice seems to stay a lot lower than what you and Attila make it out to be. Now, Federer probably has the best slice backhand in the world, so do you think that in itself would make a difference? Like I said, how low and penetrating a slice is on clay may also depend on how good your slice is and also your racquet to some degree. The heavy, small-headed racquets with the PWS like Federer uses are well known for being able to hit great slices with. What racquet do you use? Please don't tell me a Babolat.

Also, like I've said above, no one is advocating that Federer slice 100% of the time like Graf or Rosewall, just to riase that percentage from 5% to maybe 15%. That's still a change up shot, but it mixes things up evem more often ans is likely to cause Nadal more disruptions to his rhythm IMHO. I think we can all agree that trying to beat Nadal on clay by bashing with him from the baseline is not a winning formula, right?

I obviousaly haven't played Nadal, but I have played a lot of poor man Nadal clones in Eastern Europe on the dirt and the problem with the slice is that a good player can step in on the ball as it hangs up and punish you...thus the reason the best player in the world (arguably ever) does not slice much against Nadal...he realizes that in so doing he is basically handing control of the point over Nadal...something he obviuosaly doesnt want to do...

Yes, that would likely happen if you slice to Nadal's forehand. He could step in and take control of the point. Which is why from the very beginning of that now deleted thread, over 500 posts ago, I had always specifically said to slice to Nadal/s 2HBH exclusively. There are only very few times one can do this since he tends to run around his backhand. I think the best, and maybe only, time to do it is when Federer is in a crosscourt rally with is backhand to Nadal's forehand. Nadal camps out in the ad corner when this happens and Federer can pull him wider and wider off the court with greater and great crosscourt angles. That opens up the court to allow him to slice the ball down the line which Nadal has to scramble to get to. There's no way that Nadal can run around to hit hos forehand as he has to hit a low boucing shot on the run with his 2HBH, a very hard shot for even him to deal with. I've seen this exact shot work for Federer on the rare occassion that he tried it. My opinion is that he should try it more often. When Federer hits the same backhand down the line with his topspin instead of slice, Nadal seems to be able to deal with it better and hit his 2HBH on the run crosscourt with pace for a winner. OTOH, when Federer slices DTL, Nadal just seems he's just digging up the ball with his 2HBH and trying to get it over the net but he can't attack it and many times nets the shot.

carol4832
06-25-2007, 03:16 PM
If Nadal had a one handed backhand he would be awesome....
He would win every slam for the next 20 years...

He should really develop a 1HBH ????

dukemunson
06-25-2007, 03:33 PM
First off, again thank you for returning to the board...your influx of ignorance is truly helpful in keeping this thing alive. It's a fairly accepted stat (all guys ranked in Div 1 college tennis plus a whole bunch more would beat any woman in the world) as it's not only a different speed but a different game...the movement, spin and variation simply cant be replicated and yes...that goes all the way down the list to probably 3500 guys in the world. This is taking into consideration spin, speed, placement, accuracy, everything...it's just a different game.

I like how you make a point using a guy thats been in the top 5 in his sport for 5 years...its just crazy. Roddick can't beat Nadal or Federer...though to be fair, not many people can. The funny thing is, your argument actually disproves your other argument. If you look at womens tennis, or specifically as you have mentioned Serena Williams, the knock against them (her) in regards to playing a guy is a lack of ability to change the speed, spin and angle of the ball...guys simply have too much of an advantage...

Heres some advice: Don't go watch the best two players in the world play, it is too far beyond you to understand or comprehend the level. Start small. Watch the city championships to see how the winner plays. We will work you up slowly...in several years we might be able to have you watching a college tennis match with at least a small degree of understanding and comprehension. As always though continue posting...your ignorance is providing great humor...

GRANITECHIEF
06-25-2007, 03:45 PM
Entertaining stuff guys.

BP says, "Please don't tell me babolat". HAHAHA !!!! ROFLMAO. Anchorsteamers slice is awesome and most players would like to have his 2 hander as well.

And Rocket telling Duke to hug his TV and learn how Fed and Nadal win points. HAHAHA !!! Priceless.

Duke vs Rocket = 6-0,6-0,6-0,6-0.......HAHAHAHA!!

I think that if Fed sliced 10% more to Nadal on clay, that he would end up losing more points. Rafa has more time to set up his shot, meaning he'll usually hit a forehand, and doesn't seem to have any problem with the bounce. Nadal is also awesome at responding to the slice to his BH with a drive up the line, which usually gets him a forehand on the next shot.

I also seem to recall that in the wimby final last year, Fed did seem to be using the slice more, since the grass helps it stay low/skid. Probably the same this year.

I guessing Fed has a better knowledge of the balance of slice/drive as appropriate for a given surface than any posters here.

I would really like to see a match between Fed/Nadal where Fed is 2 hander and Nadal is 1. Bring it on!!! Oh yeah, and they both hit 2 handed forehand slices too!!

anchorsteamer
06-25-2007, 03:59 PM
What racquet do you use? Please don't tell me a Babolat..

pure drive plus...slowly and sadly shaking head...damnit

VikingSamurai
06-25-2007, 04:15 PM
First off, again thank you for returning to the board...your influx of ignorance is truly helpful in keeping this thing alive. It's a fairly accepted stat (all guys ranked in Div 1 college tennis plus a whole bunch more would beat any woman in the world) as it's not only a different speed but a different game...the movement, spin and variation simply cant be replicated and yes...that goes all the way down the list to probably 3500 guys in the world. This is taking into consideration spin, speed, placement, accuracy, everything...it's just a different game.

I like how you make a point using a guy thats been in the top 5 in his sport for 5 years...its just crazy. Roddick can't beat Nadal or Federer...though to be fair, not many people can. The funny thing is, your argument actually disproves your other argument. If you look at womens tennis, or specifically as you have mentioned Serena Williams, the knock against them (her) in regards to playing a guy is a lack of ability to change the speed, spin and angle of the ball...guys simply have too much of an advantage...

Heres some advice: Don't go watch the best two players in the world play, it is too far beyond you to understand or comprehend the level. Start small. Watch the city championships to see how the winner plays. We will work you up slowly...in several years we might be able to have you watching a college tennis match with at least a small degree of understanding and comprehension. As always though continue posting...your ignorance is providing great humor...

Duz that meen them thar college players are edumicated? Theys must be reel smart tennis players!

Duke.. So if they are so good at what they do. Why isnt the ATP full of college players.. If they are as wonderful as you are suggesting. Then surely the US wouldnt have to worry about having future world #1's for the next few decades?.

I have seen intelligent people on these boards suggest that the level of the ATP is pretty poor in the history of things at the momment. So if that is the case. It doesnt say alot for your college guys then?. They may all be on the same level, and so why you think it looks like a grind, but come on. Stop with the telling people to go watch this and that, and stick to the subject at hand.. As I have said many times. You have berated nearly everyone that has had an opinion other than yours. But you havnt offered any factually or reasonable advice?

Telling me you played at a high level on an internet message board, isnt exactly grounds for being smarter than the rest of the members here. Infact, we have no proof of that, and for all we know, you could be some pimple faced kid sitting at his dads computer playing "big boys"..

Now on the other hand. You might have played at a higher level. But that still doesnt make you "right".. ;)

VikingSamurai
06-25-2007, 04:16 PM
pure drive plus...slowly and sadly shaking head...damnit

I feel your pain on that one.. BP got that one right.. Atleast you have a sence of humour which is cool anchor..

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 04:20 PM
pure drive plus...slowly and sadly shaking head...damnit
Well, looks like I called that one. ;) LOL

I've never seen you play so I can't comment on your slice, but personally I have trouble hitting great slices with lighter, stiffer racquets like all Babolats, and I don't see too many other guys hitting great slices with Babolats either. OTOH, a see a lot of guys using Wilson ProStaffs (which include the PS 6.0 & 6.1, nCode 90, K90, PS Tour 90, etc.) hit biting, penetrating slices. I can slice pretty well with both my nCode 90 and my PS 6.0 95.

Anyway, although this isn't a definitive indicator, just compare Roddick's slice with Federer's slice. Really no comparison.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 04:32 PM
I guessing Fed has a better knowledge of the balance of slice/drive as appropriate for a given surface than any posters here.

Well, apparently not. In the '05 FO semis, Federer sliced A LOT more and lost to Nadal in 4 sets. In the '06 final, he hardly sliced at all and lost to Nadal in 4 sets. In the '07 final, he hardly sliced at all and again lost to Nadal in 4 sets.

So can we conclude that topspin doesn't work against Nadal either on red clay?

And can we also agree that trying to outhit Nadal with topspin from the baseline is NOT a winning formula? Many, many guys have tried and have lost. So why not change things up and throw in some more slices which very few other guys on the tour do at all? What's the worst that'll happen as you're going to lose anyway if you don't?

dukemunson
06-25-2007, 05:02 PM
Duz that meen them thar college players are edumicated? Theys must be reel smart tennis players!

Duke.. So if they are so good at what they do. Why isnt the ATP full of college players.. If they are as wonderful as you are suggesting. Then surely the US wouldnt have to worry about having future world #1's for the next few decades?.;)

Thats my point about how much different womens tennis is then mens...every guy ranked in college tennis would beat serena or henin or venus or mauresmo or serena then henin then venus then mauresmo...and yet you will never hear of more then 2 or 3 of them. That was the whole point Chris, there are thousands upon thousands of male tennis players out there that can hit 120 mph serves and couple it with a forehand, decent movement or combination that would allow them to consistently beat any of the women. And if theres a 200 guys in college that can beat the women, multiply that by at least 10 (guys grinding it out on the dirt or carpet or hard courts of Korea, Japan, Australia, Europe, etc...) and you start to get an idea of how many guys out there can play this game well....

VikingSamurai
06-25-2007, 06:17 PM
Obviously not well enough.. ;-) Sound like college tennis is developing Roddick clones, and not very entertaining and talented tennis players at that.. It certainly doesnt qualify a 120 serve and big forhand as the basis for being a smart tennis player?

In saying that. I hope something happens in the near future, because tennis isnt a very exciting game to watch at the momment. And regardless if you think these guys are better than the women. Then I will watch the women in a heart beat compared to watching Nadal pick his butt and sweat on the court like its raining..

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 06:46 PM
Ralf Nadal will win this year with his two hander :-)

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 06:51 PM
Well, looks like I called that one. ;) LOL

I've never seen you play so I can't comment on your slice, but personally I have trouble hitting great slices with lighter, stiffer racquets like all Babolats, and I don't see too many other guys hitting great slices with Babolats either. OTOH, a see a lot of guys using Wilson ProStaffs (which include the PS 6.0 & 6.1, nCode 90, K90, PS Tour 90, etc.) hit biting, penetrating slices. I can slice pretty well with both my nCode 90 and my PS 6.0 95.

The slice is a pretty weak shot. It's a nice approach shot like you say comming in to the net on a two hander though. I can slice but remember playing my best baseline tennis telling myself not to slice, nothing but big groundies off both wings.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 07:07 PM
The slice is a pretty weak shot. It's a nice approach shot like you say comming in to the net on a two hander though. I can slice but remember playing my best baseline tennis telling myself not to slice, nothing but big groundies off both wings.
Like I said, it depends on how good your slice is. Federer seems to do pretty well by slicing a lot of his backhands in most of his matches during the year (except against Nadal in the FO final for whatever reason).

BTW, I'm going to ask you the same question that I asked anchorsteamer. What racquet do you use? A Babolat by any chance?

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 07:08 PM
Ralf Nadal will win this year with his two hander :-)
More likely he'll lose to Mardy Fish in the 1st round.

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 07:11 PM
More likely he'll lose to Mardy Fish in the 1st round.

Yea, dont forget nadal was in the finals. Maybe fish will go to the finals lol.

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 07:20 PM
BTW, I'm going to ask you the same question that I asked anchorsteamer. What racquet do you use? A Babolat by any chance?

No the 85 china. But gonna switch, something in between babolat and wilson. Comfort is more important now. But i have played with babolat type power racquet. You tend to want to just bash backahands, no slice with those. Agassi had a pretty good slice i recall for a two hander.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 07:32 PM
Yea, dont forget nadal was in the finals. Maybe fish will go to the finals lol.
Yeah, don't forget that Fish is better version of Kendrick, and Kendrick was two points away from beating Nadal in the 2nd round several times last year.

However, Fish does have a foot injury. Extremely fortunate for Nadal or else he's toast.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 07:35 PM
Agassi had a pretty good slice i recall for a two hander.
Not really. He hit underspin drop shots and some defensive slices with one hand when pulled off the court way wide but I don't recall ever seeing him hit an offensive slice with either one nor two hands off his backhand.

The Gorilla
06-25-2007, 07:47 PM
how is fish a better version of kendrick exactly?

He's:

shorter

Slower

Doesn't serve as big

Or as consistently

doesn't volley as well

Has the forehand of a 9 year old girl

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 07:54 PM
Not really. He hit underspin drop shots and some defensive slices with one hand when pulled off the court way wide but I don't recall ever seeing him hit an offensive slice with either one nor two hands off his backhand.

Who hits "offensive" slices now anyways, is that even possible? Why would agassi hit a slice when he punishes his backhand? The slice approach really dont work no more either, like in the 70's.. At lower levels it still works, not at the pro level.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 08:01 PM
how is fish a better version of kendrick exactly?

He's:

shorter

Slower

Doesn't serve as big

Or as consistently

doesn't volley as well

Has the forehand of a 9 year old girl

When was the last time Kendrick won an Olympic silver medal or made it to the quarters of a Grand Slam or the final of a Masters Series event or played on the US Davis Cup team as a regular. This is in addition to Fish's high ranking of 17 and current ranking of 36, and Kendrick's high ranking of 77 and current ranking of 88.

BTW, I also think Fish has a better serve than Kendrick. And yes, Fish volleys just as well, if not better, than Kendrick. And no way is Kendrick faster than Fish. Kendrick is one of the slowest and worst movers in the Top 100, that's why he storms the net on everything on any surface.

Lastly, the commentators on ESPN also happened to mention today that they think Fish is a better version of Kendrick. And I would agree.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 08:08 PM
Who hits "offensive" slices now anyways, is that even possible? Why would agassi hit a slice when he punishes his backhand? The slice approach really dont work no more either, like in the 70's.. At lower levels it still works, not at the pro level.
Any slice that you choose to hit when you're standing in the middle of the court, and not pulled off wide and forced to hit a slice, is an offensive slice. I do it all the time. And so does Federer. He may even do it more than I do.

Tell Federer or Henman that slice approach shots don't work because they both still do it all the time and successfully. It's also been Roddick's new trademark shot for the past year.

You're the one that brought up that Agassi has a nice slice, not me. Like I said, I almost never see him slice as he hits flat 2HBH's most of the time.

And the fact that you never hit an offensive slice tells me that you don't really know how to hit an effective slice. Don't worry, most 2-handers can't do it, either.

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 08:15 PM
And the fact that you never hit an offensive slice tells me that you don't really know how to hit an effective slice. Don't worry, most 2-handers can't do it, either.

Lol if you seen me play you would disagree. Also yes from the Mid court it's possible, not really from the baseline. I'll keep in mind how effective the slice is this wimbledon. It did look pretty effective watching borg-mac today. It was almost funny watching borg hit a forehand approach slice.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 08:32 PM
Lol if you seen me play you would disagree. Also yes from the Mid court it's possible, not really from the baseline. I'll keep in mind how effective the slice is this wimbledon. It did look pretty effective watching borg-mac today. It was almost funny watching borg hit a forehand approach slice.
Henman was also hitting lots of backhand slice approach shots against Moya today.

Yup, Borg had a good forehand slice. I also still hit forehand slice approach shots quite often. Right down the line to a 2-hander's (or 1-hander's) backhand. Works like a charm and usually sets up a nice easy volley to the open court. :D

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 08:41 PM
Henman was also hitting lots of backhand slice approach shots against Moya today.

Any good serve and volleyer worth his salt has a good slice.



Yup, Borg had a good forehand slice. I also still hit forehand slice approach shots quite often.

:)

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 08:45 PM
Any good serve and volleyer worth his salt has a good slice.

Yes, it's called constructing a point. Something that younger players seem to be totally unfamiliar with. They seem to think that baseline bashing is the only way to play tennis. I'm just glad to see that some guys, like Federer, are a lot smarter than that.

Ultra2HolyGrail
06-25-2007, 09:05 PM
Yes, it's called constructing a point. Something that younger players seem to be totally unfamiliar with. They seem to think that baseline bashing is the only way to play tennis. I'm just glad to see that some guys, like Federer, are a lot smarter than that.n


The thing is it's much easier to just camp at the baseline nowadays. Racquets like babolat makes it hard to serve and volley, most of good players nowadays just hit the ball hard with alot of topspin making all court play a pretty tough task for younger players to do, especially if they dont have a big serve. Even the big servers like roddick are baseliners, him trying to perform miracles at the net wont work.

BreakPoint
06-25-2007, 09:13 PM
Well, I would say that Sampras' record against Agassi at both Wimbledon and the US Open indicates that serving and volleying still works on faster surfaces, even against the best baseliner in the world.

VikingSamurai
06-25-2007, 09:17 PM
Doesn't say alot about the design of modern racquets, when they restrict you to just baseline bashing?.. Pretty boring way to play if ask me?

VikingSamurai
06-25-2007, 09:27 PM
I am now 32, but gave up tennis 14 or so years ago.. Before I did, I wanted to have a red hot go at it, but injury and finally a lack of desire burned me out.. At that time, I know damn well, that I was hitting the ball, just as hard as the juniors today are at the same age.. At 32, I think I can hit the ball just as hard, if not harder than I once did. I know I can serve faster than when I took tennis seriously. So other than being older, and lacking in leg speed, and fitness. Can someone explain to me, why kids talk as if tennis has improved so much, that us older guys dont understand what is going on in today's game?

Another thing that I dont see, is the use of multiple grips and shots.. The reason I mention this, in any given match, I can use anywhere in the number of 5 to 6 different grips in order to hold the racquet and play shots.. Nowdays, they seem to hold the racquet one way, and hit everything with it.. My backhand alone, I use 3 or 4 different ways of holding the racquet in order to execute a certain shot..

Dont get me started on slice forehands, backhands, flat hitting and the like..

hyrulemaster
06-25-2007, 09:28 PM
You guys argue too much.

Imagine all the people living life in peace! :)

Good idea, no?

federerfanatic
06-26-2007, 01:09 AM
Well, I would say that Sampras' record against Agassi at both Wimbledon and the US Open indicates that serving and volleying still works on faster surfaces, even against the best baseliner in the world.

Or did when you are an amazing server, with a great serve-volley game, and played back in the days surfaces were faster.

dukemunson
06-26-2007, 06:38 AM
Well, apparently not. In the '05 FO semis, Federer sliced A LOT more and lost to Nadal in 4 sets. In the '06 final, he hardly sliced at all and lost to Nadal in 4 sets. In the '07 final, he hardly sliced at all and again lost to Nadal in 4 sets.

So can we conclude that topspin doesn't work against Nadal either on red clay?

And can we also agree that trying to outhit Nadal with topspin from the baseline is NOT a winning formula? Many, many guys have tried and have lost. So why not change things up and throw in some more slices which very few other guys on the tour do at all? What's the worst that'll happen as you're going to lose anyway if you don't?

I'm still not sold on the notion that Federer played the wrong match at the French. He got tight and went 1-17 on break points...

BreakPoint
06-26-2007, 06:41 AM
Or did when you are an amazing server, with a great serve-volley game, and played back in the days surfaces were faster.
Well, Rafter wasn't nearly the "amazing server" that Sampras was but he still had a very good record against Agassi at Wimbledon and the US Open in the latter part of Rafter's career.

BreakPoint
06-26-2007, 06:47 AM
I'm still not sold on the notion that Federer played the wrong match at the French. He got tight and went 1-17 on break points...
Yeah, but most of those break points were in the 1st set when Nadal was still cold, as he tends to be a slow starter and plays himself into the match. Note Federer's easy 6-1 first set against Nadal in last year's FO final, and his even easier 6-0 first set against Nadal in last year's Wimbledon final.

Federer was also winning a lot of points serving and volleying and just coming to the net in general on the rare occasions that he did it. I think he should have come forward a lot more. Again, baseline bashing against Nadal on red clay is not a winning formula IMO.

dukemunson
06-26-2007, 08:16 AM
Breakpoint- If Fed wins that first set I think he wins the match...Obviousaly winning the first set would have changed the second set and perhaps Nadal would have stepped up but If Fed wins the first after bageling him the last set in Hamburg I gotta think the world #1 takes the match...


Chris- I was referring to Rocket's assertion that womens tennis matters in some context, or that Serena's serve would actually effect or bother men. College tennis is actually a pretty interesting collection of styles and play, everything from serve and volley to baselining on display front center.

As for the state of tennis, I don't know anyone that has stated intelligently that the over-all depth and quality of tennis is down that far. I think it's top heavy at 1-2, then admitedly drops off significantly (Davydenko should not be 4 in the world in this great game of tennis) but theres never been quality and depth like there is now.

VikingSamurai
06-26-2007, 04:30 PM
Well, with a hundred or so posts, and half of them coming from the last 2 recent Nadal & Fed threads, I would probably also assume that you havnt had anyone say that about the mens game as of yet!]

As for college players.. Cant stay in college forever.. ;-)

anchorsteamer
06-27-2007, 09:06 AM
Well, with a hundred or so posts, and half of them coming from the last 2 recent Nadal & Fed threads, I would probably also assume that you havnt had anyone say that about the mens game as of yet!]

As for college players.. Cant stay in college forever.. ;-)

I don't think he was referring to points made solely on this board, the depth of tennis in 2007 is without a doubt deeper then its ever been. Not sure what the college comment at the end meant, though I agree with Duke that you should go check out a few college matches...you'll see some good tennis and it will open your eyes about how good the guys in the top 100 really are (as no more then 2-3 of the guys at the top of the college ranks will ever see the better side of 100)

BreakPoint
06-27-2007, 09:35 AM
I don't think he was referring to points made solely on this board, the depth of tennis in 2007 is without a doubt deeper then its ever been. Not sure what the college comment at the end meant, though I agree with Duke that you should go check out a few college matches...you'll see some good tennis and it will open your eyes about how good the guys in the top 100 really are (as no more then 2-3 of the guys at the top of the college ranks will ever see the better side of 100)
I agree that there's a lot of high quality tennis in Div. 1 college tennis, especially in the top ranked teams. I used to go watch a lot of matches at Stanford and Cal.

But also keep in mind that the very best players tend to skip college altogether, e.g., Federer, Nadal, Roddick, etc., so that's another reason why you won't see too many college players within the Top 100.

anchorsteamer
06-27-2007, 09:48 AM
I agree that there's a lot of high quality tennis in Div. 1 college tennis, especially in the top ranked teams. I used to go watch a lot of matches at Stanford and Cal.

But also keep in mind that the very best players tend to skip college altogether, e.g., Federer, Nadal, Roddick, etc., so that's another reason why you won't see too many college players within the Top 100.

Yep...its crazy and disheartening how many guys can combine solid serves with good movement a big forehand and at least a steady backhand. Lot of good players out there...