PDA

View Full Version : Wimbledon easier to win now


richied
06-24-2009, 07:50 PM
I was just thinking wimbledon is a cake walk compared to 20 years ago.

Courier, Becker, Edberg, Agassi, Goran, Pete, playing in the same era, all with healthy chances to win wimbledon on their day!!


Nowadays, your chances look a little brighter. IMO

You only have to worry about Fed and Nadal to be honest...obviously ninja's, but still at least a better chance to make it to the semi

RoddickAce
06-24-2009, 08:06 PM
I was just thinking wimbledon is a cake walk compared to 20 years ago.

Courier, Becker, Edberg, Agassi, Goran, Pete, playing in the same era, all with healthy chances to win wimbledon on their day!!


Nowadays, your chances look a little brighter. IMO

You only have to worry about Fed and Nadal to be honest...obviously ninja's, but still at least a better chance to make it to the semi

Depends on who you are lolz...I doubt someone like Simon wouldn't be worried about Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Karlovic, Tsonga, Cilic, etc.

IvanAndreevich
06-24-2009, 09:22 PM
Depends on who you are lolz...I doubt someone like Simon wouldn't be worried about Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Karlovic, Tsonga, Cilic, etc.

Ding-dong we have a winner.

EtePras
06-24-2009, 09:24 PM
If it was so easy, there would be more than 2 people in the draw who've done it.

egn
06-24-2009, 09:28 PM
I was just thinking wimbledon is a cake walk compared to 20 years ago.

Courier, Becker, Edberg, Agassi, Goran, Pete, playing in the same era, all with healthy chances to win wimbledon on their day!!


Nowadays, your chances look a little brighter. IMO

You only have to worry about Fed and Nadal to be honest...obviously ninja's, but still at least a better chance to make it to the semi


Yea thats if you are not one of those guys today players only worry about Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Roddick, Karlovic, Tsonga, Cilic, Ancic..I think you get the drift. Also 20 years ago..89? or are we talking 90? Either way Courier had one good wimbledon year, in 1990 Sampras was no threat at wimbledon, Agassi wasn't even playing them..not sure about Goran, but Edberg and Becker were there.... >.> I would say 93-94 was a deep wimbledon field thats about it though.

TBobLP
06-24-2009, 09:29 PM
not any easier...still have to win 7 in a row.

Nadal_Freak
06-24-2009, 09:30 PM
I thought this was another thread to discredits Nadal's win last year by saying it is easier to win on the new grass or something crazy like that. All-court players is the way it is these days. Surfaces are not full of specialists anymore.

FedFan_2009
06-24-2009, 09:30 PM
Yeah easy as pie to beat Fed....

ChanceEncounter
06-24-2009, 09:31 PM
not any easier...still have to win 7 in a row.
Exactly.

Roger Federer and Lleyton Hewitt are the only two people in the entire draw that's won the tournament before.

tacou
06-24-2009, 09:34 PM
very easy all you have to do is win 7 matches. they should change it to 8 ! that way it will be equal to when sampras won.

egn
06-24-2009, 09:40 PM
very easy all you have to do is win 7 matches. they should change it to 8 ! that way it will be equal to when sampras won.

huh what sampras only won 7 though....
1r
2r
3r
4r
qf
sf
f

??where is this 8?

tacou
06-24-2009, 09:42 PM
huh what sampras only won 7 though....
1r
2r
3r
4r
qf
sf
f

??where is this 8?

yeah but it was obviously much harder to win back then as the brilliant OP stated, so by adding an extra match or maybe best of 7 sets it will as prestigious a tournament as then :D

rwn
06-24-2009, 11:09 PM
I was just thinking wimbledon is a cake walk compared to 20 years ago.

Courier, Becker, Edberg, Agassi, Goran, Pete, playing in the same era, all with healthy chances to win wimbledon on their day!!


Nowadays, your chances look a little brighter. IMO

You only have to worry about Fed and Nadal to be honest...obviously ninja's, but still at least a better chance to make it to the semi

I stopped reading when I saw the name Courier mentioned as a great grasscourter.

joeri888
06-24-2009, 11:21 PM
I thought this was another thread to discredits Nadal's win last year by saying it is easier to win on the new grass or something crazy like that. All-court players is the way it is these days. Surfaces are not full of specialists anymore.

+1, it's a shame though, because it was a lot better to have as many diversity as there used to be. I think the homogenous surfaces, players etc. is very bad for tennis as a whole.

syntex1
06-25-2009, 12:45 AM
As its been said by commentators on tv or about twenty other topics its the fact u can stand six foot behind the court and hit cross court winners into the service box of your opponent that u dont see as many serve volley players. string and racquets are the reason.

my theory is with all the sucess the spanish and french federations are having over last 10 years + with the number of good players they produce that make top 100, their coaching is based mostly around clay court tennis as juinors better point construction, longer rallies, more reliable ground strokes, etc, this sucess means a few other countries have adopted their trainning techniques which means alot more baseliners. You also get alot of players from all over the world trainning with these squads aswell as its a proven formula for sucess.