PDA

View Full Version : What was missing in Todd Martin's game?


flymeng
07-24-2006, 10:46 AM
I like Todd Martin. A nice guy and great player. I enjoyed watching him played in the USO late nites coming back from 2 sets down. I think one opponent was Carlos Moya and I forgot the other. He had all the shots: big serve, good ground strokes and volleying skills. He was in the AO 94 finals, loosing to Sampras and USO 99 finals, loosing to Agassi. I felt he could have won Wimby 96 if he had not lost in the semis to Malavai Washington. He could have won a few majors but it didn't happen. I believed it was all up in the head for him.

Marat Safinator
07-24-2006, 10:53 AM
Todd Martin was an excellent player, he had many wins from 2 sets down. Its actually pretty funny how many times he came back.

simi
07-24-2006, 10:56 AM
Todd played in the era of "tough competition". He is rarely mentioned as a member of the "fab four" of Sampras, Agassi, Courier, and Chang; even though his career paralleled theirs. In my opinion, he should be. A great ambassador of the game and served as the ATP player's rep for several years.

Colpo
07-24-2006, 10:58 AM
Todd had no one big weapon. While that's not always a critical point, looking at his career in retrospect, we can say that it was a big deal in his case. His groundies were solid-plus, nothing more. You wouldn't call him a power or a finesse player. His serve wasn't big enough to blow people off the court, or dig him out of holes. His all-court game got a B+ across the boards, without any A's in the mix. A nice player, some might say that his Slam finishes were an overachievement given what he brought to the table.

I still love his RCA commercials with the puppies.

flymeng
07-24-2006, 11:04 AM
In my opinion, Todd had a bigger game than Chang and Courier. He was more talented and dangerous due to his serve and volleying skills. I thought his game was comparable to Sampras but did not play the big points well.

armand
07-24-2006, 11:05 AM
I remember McEnroe saying that his shots on the run weren't that good. And I guess since he was a really big guy, he'd have to hit on the run often...

The ball was in
07-24-2006, 11:18 AM
Todd was a true gent and an asset to the game. I guess the only things that I saw that were missing from his game was speed around the court, and having the nerve when it really mattered.

He was gutsier than most players and some players of today, but when compared to Sampras, Agassi, Courier and possibly Chang, Todd Martin just didn't quite have that little extra to call on.

Also, injuries didn't help him out either!

quest01
07-24-2006, 11:20 AM
His foot speed. It took him about an hour to serve and he wasnt very quick on the court. I think his speed and quickness let him down.

The tennis guy
07-24-2006, 11:25 AM
His foot speed. It took him about an hour to serve and he wasnt very quick on the court. I think his speed and quickness let him down.
Agree completely. He was not athletic enough. He was male version of Davenport. However, his power relative to other male pros was not at the same level of Davenport relative to other female pros.

As of Wimbledon, even if he beat Washington in semi, he would be underdog against Krajicek at final.

helloworld
07-24-2006, 11:28 AM
How old is Todd Martin anyway ?? I swear he looks just like my uncle who is 60 years old...

The ball was in
07-24-2006, 11:31 AM
How old is Todd Martin anyway ?? I swear he looks just like my uncle who is 60 years old...

Mid 30's I think....

simi
07-24-2006, 12:35 PM
How old is Todd Martin anyway ?? I swear he looks just like my uncle who is 60 years old...

Just turned 36.

http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/playerprofiles/?playernumber=M442

Dan007
07-24-2006, 12:44 PM
Todd Martin had a pretty good overall game, but his movement was the missing part of his game.

35ft6
07-24-2006, 12:46 PM
Todd had no one big weapon. While that's not always a critical point, looking at his career in retrospect, we can say that it was a big deal in his case. His groundies were solid-plus, nothing more. You wouldn't call him a power or a finesse player. His serve wasn't big enough to blow people off the court, or dig him out of holes. His all-court game got a B+ across the boards, without any A's in the mix. A nice player, some might say that his Slam finishes were an overachievement given what he brought to the table. Agree completely. Especially the overachievement part. Except for that time he should have made the Wimbledon finals, I think considering his physical gifts, or lack thereof, he did incredibly well. He was a very disciplined, strategy minded player, but probably one of the worst athletes to make it to the ATP top 10 of the past 25 years. He had a great career.

typingchamp
07-24-2006, 12:51 PM
Speed is important. His game lacked speed. Also, like a lot of players of his generation (other than Michael Chang it seems), he was all offense. When he got behind in a point, very rarely did he pull off the type of crazy defense we see nowadays from Nadal and Federer.

jaggy
07-24-2006, 12:52 PM
I loved his donations that made NW tennis center something to be proud of, I still cant believe he lost to Mal Washington in Wimby sf's though

flymeng
07-24-2006, 06:22 PM
Speed is important. His game lacked speed. Also, like a lot of players of his generation (other than Michael Chang it seems), he was all offense. When he got behind in a point, very rarely did he pull off the type of crazy defense we see nowadays from Nadal and Federer.


I agree that Todd lacked speed but he made it up with his reach. He is 6'6" tall. I think taller players have a tougher time with footwork adjustments when it comes to positioning to hit the ball.

dmastous
07-24-2006, 08:26 PM
I like Todd Martin. A nice guy and great player. I enjoyed watching him played in the USO late nites coming back from 2 sets down. I think one opponent was Carlos Moya and I forgot the other. He had all the shots: big serve, good ground strokes and volleying skills. He was in the AO 94 finals, loosing to Sampras and USO 99 finals, loosing to Agassi. I felt he could have won Wimby 96 if he had not lost in the semis to Malavai Washington. He could have won a few majors but it didn't happen. I believed it was all up in the head for him.
Rusedski was the other big comeback. That was a classic match.
Martin was the classic overachiever. He didn't really do anything great, he was slow, and he didn't have any stand out shot to beat you with. Yet he won.
I think his biggest problem is my biggest problem. He's 6'5". Height may seem like an asset, but in the end it's not worth what it gives you in the serve. You are slower, have less natural balance, and it takes longer to swing (getting those long arms around).