Tennis myths that really annoy me

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by BeHappy, May 6, 2008.

  1. BeHappy

    BeHappy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,789
    1)Nikolay Davydenkol is just a grinder, like Hewitt, who doesnt have any weapons to hurt you.

    -No, his backhand and his forehand are both as good as Federer's.He is one of the most powerful players I have ever seen.

    2)Gonzalez's backhand was a huge liability before he started working with Stefanki.

    -No, It was nearly as powerful as his forehand and pretty much always went in, I don't know why Stefanki completely changed that shot but he has destroyed it.


    3)Nadal is just a grinder.

    -see no. 1



    I'll add to this later.
     
    #1
  2. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,548
    Location:
    Back from prison
    4) Federer can lose a match only if he is not healthy.
    - no need to explain.
     
    #2
  3. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,889
    if he's so powerful, how come he doesn't hit a lot of winners? far less than Federer.
     
    #3
  4. BeHappy

    BeHappy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,789
    Last edited: May 6, 2008
    #4
  5. BeHappy

    BeHappy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,789
    4)Goran Ivanisevic was just a serve, his other strokes were terrible.

    -No, this only applied on grass which amplified the effects of his serve, but the low bounce coupled with his strong forehand grip made it very difficult for him to do anything else as he was really a baseliner.He wasn't really a volleyer, he just put away easy returns on grass.

    He's, outside of monfils, the fastest tall man I've ever seen, he had outstanding groundstrokes.




    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ULl-YURr028
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2008
    #5
  6. PROTENNIS63

    PROTENNIS63 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,722
    Fed should retire after his loss to Djoko in the Aussie Open.

    That is the best one.
     
    #6
  7. BkK_b0y14

    BkK_b0y14 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    659
    Davydenko is so underrated everywhere. For such a tiny guy he can get some serious pace on every stroke. The only thing that separates him from the likes of Federer and Nadal is his mental game (even though he has beaten Nadal). I really don't see why his record against top 10 players is so low...
     
    #7
  8. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,541
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    He also had a fantastic slice backhand, and one of the best dropshots in the history of the game.
     
    #8
  9. cghipp

    cghipp Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,282
    [Any pro's name here] sucks.
     
    #9
  10. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,017
    Safin is a virgin.
     
    #10
  11. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    Now that is the best one. :D Safin has probably been getting some for awhile now. I am jealous.
     
    #11
  12. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,029
    Myth: Having pro spec frames will actually help your game. With the ladies.
     
    #12
  13. MajinX

    MajinX Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Toronto
    Andy roddick is just a serve.

    - guy has been in top ten for over 5 years straight... if just a good serve gets u there then ur dis respecting all the other players.
     
    #13
  14. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Agreed on Ivanisevic. He went for touch a lot, particularly on grass.

    Many folks have a misconception about groundies. They see a guy hitting the crap out of the ball and they deem that his groundies are good. Then they see a guy hitting slices or with topspin and make the opposite conclusion, merely because the ball doesn't travel as quickly.

    Take Evgeny Korolev. Monster groundies. No variety. No brain.
     
    #14
  15. jmsx521

    jmsx521 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    3,496
    Myth: That the ball actually touches the strings and/or the racket on impact; according to physics, atoms prevent touching each other because of the positive and negative charges they have, that create energy/electricity among each other. (Physics majors help me out here!) And going by the rules of tennis -- a tennis player loses the point if the ball touches anything but the strings & racket -- nobody won any points and matches, since the ball never touched their strings & racket.... So, with that being said, all tournament winners' trophies should be confiscated and their wins should be annulled!
     
    #15
  16. Vision84

    Vision84 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,655
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Roddick's backhand sucks.
    Roddick wouldn't be in the top 100 with an average pro serve
    Sampras is capable of playing on the pro tour and winning matches again.
    Those exhibitions between Sampras and Federer means something.
    The one-handed backhand is better than the two-hander
    Any average player will automatically play much better with a pro's frame.
     
    #16
  17. Vision84

    Vision84 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,655
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Hahaha..........
     
    #17
  18. [d]ragon

    [d]ragon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,466
    wow, i just watched that link u posted (davy vs nadal shanghai) and davydanko really is a great player. i;ve never really watched him before but i now notice that not only is he very agile but he also hits the ball on the rise alot, also uses very nice selection
     
    #18
  19. [d]ragon

    [d]ragon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,466
    to add on to that, if any pro uses X equipment, it must also work for me
     
    #19
  20. tennisplayer1981

    tennisplayer1981 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Messages:
    126
    Myth: Yuri Sharapov is one of the nicest people you'll ever meet.

    Time to call the Mythbusters.
     
    #20
  21. Vision84

    Vision84 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,655
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Who says he is?
     
    #21
  22. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    I actually think he is nice. It's just he is too competitive and it can **** off fans.
     
    #22
  23. tennisplayer1981

    tennisplayer1981 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Messages:
    126
    His daughter, Maria.
     
    #23
  24. BeHappy

    BeHappy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,789
    5)Edberg's forehand was the absolute worst shot in the history of tennis, he couldn't keep the ball in the court.

    -The supposed crappiness of his forehand has reached almost mythical levels, it really wasn't that bad at all, it was about as good as gasquet's, he didn't hit it very hard but he very seldom made unforced errors with it and he could seriously unload on it if you forced him into a corner.
     
    #24
  25. bluetrain4

    bluetrain4 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    8,840

    Totally agree, though I've never really heard it described as the "worst". More often, it is just described as "ugly." And it was, but he knew exactly what to do with it. He could take the ball low off the bounce and block pack pace. He could throw in a few moon balls to get back in position if he was pulled wide. He had incredible timing and placement, even if he lacked power and excessive spin. I heard several commentators say that his forehand was actually better on the run, when he didn't have to think about it so much.
     
    #25
  26. iamke55

    iamke55 Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,084
    I like the way you think. But the sad part is, there are probably many people here who seriously think all of that is true, especially in the Racket forum.

    Myth: Andy Roddick is a one dimensional power baseliner who just has a forehand and serve.
    Reality: He doesn't have much power outside of the serve but plays a smart, varied all-court game that relies on mixing up the pace so that the lack of rhythm will cause his opponents to hit many "unforced" errors. This is why people will always make excuses for why top 3 players lose to him while playing junior-style "go for winners on every shot" tennis.

    Myth: Federer at his best is beatable.
    Reality: He wasn't at his absolute best against Safin or against Djokovic. Federer at his best doesn't lose games, let alone sets.

    Myth: Sampras has a more accurate and spinnier serve than Roddick.
    Reality: Roddick has a much higher serving percentage as well as much more velocity, and when considering both of these it's plain that Roddick is far more accurate and hits with way more spin. That and the fact that Roddick wins a higher percentage of second serve points than Sampras despite apparently sucking at tennis.

    Myth: Agassi had the best return of serve ever.
    Reality: He holds the record for being aced the most times in a match. He also could never beat Sampras as easily as Hewitt did.

    Myth: Federer's serve is worse than Sampras's.
    Reality: In their only match, 25 aces vs 26 aces is not a big difference. That was the only time you could compare their serve on an equal surface. Federer's current ace counts are lower than Sampras's 10 years ago because the courts are a lot slower.

    Myth: Federer doesn't have a big forehand.
    Reality: Guys like Gonzalez and Blake wish they had Federer's forehand. You don't hit that many winners without creating huge pace from every position.

    Myth: Federer has a top 5 backhand.
    Reality: It's an average rallying shot that is very good for defense.
     
    #26
  27. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,017
    I assume you mean the AO 2005 semis. You should watch it again. I thought Federer played pretty damn well (- myth; Federer is a machine, not a man).

    So, Federer at his best wins 6-0 every set? Meaning, he has never been at his best? (I am surprised you didn't say that Federer at his best doesn't even lose a single point).
     
    #27
  28. Vision84

    Vision84 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,655
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Agassi is a great returner, he just never had the reach so he was aced more often than some other players.

    Federer's backhand is a bit more of an average rallying shot. He has the best slice I have seen and his top-spin while not as good as Gasquet is still pretty good.
     
    #28
  29. bluetrain4

    bluetrain4 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    8,840
    Agassi went for broke on a lot of returns. He was the best at hitting winners off the return. But, he was far from the best at getting the highest percentage of balls back in play.
     
    #29
  30. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    If he got his racquet on it then he usually got it back - he wasn't like Blake who TRULY goes for broke, and as a result often blasts a relatively easy return right into the net. So he'd get aced more than a taller guy who stands further back who, instead of being aced, either frames it or hits a very weak return that gets pummeled.
     
    #30
  31. MEAC_ALLAMERICAN

    MEAC_ALLAMERICAN Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,040
    There are many people that refuted Davydenko's current ranking as the number 4 ranked player in the game to these exacts same reasons. He is one of the best players, that I have I seen in person, and I have seen him play more than a few (4) times. At his best he can beat anyone, Federer is the one for me, but he is the best one on the list. Nobody can take the ball as accurate or early as he can in this current generation. Hate it or not, but this guy is the truth.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2008
    #31
  32. Squall Leonheart

    Squall Leonheart Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Messages:
    223
    Every single person on these boards can volley better than Roddick. In reality, the difference between the worst pro's worst shot and an average Joe's best shot is incomprable.
     
    #32
  33. Fries-N-Gravy

    Fries-N-Gravy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    478
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    the difference is incomparable? wth does that mean? did your death god tell you to say that?

    you mean a pro's worst shot is equal to avg joe's best? or pro's worst shot is vastly superior to avg joe?


    MYTH: federer is not good on clay... he is human and does lose sometimes in earlier rounds even on hardcourt. Nadal has just been nearly invincible on clay and it overshadows fed's accomplishments. what is it like a semi and two finals at RG now? even with that horrible one hander that breaks down against high topspin shots.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2008
    #33
  34. mypod4900

    mypod4900 New User

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    35
    Ya his ground strokes are like bombs. But his serve is no doubt the high point of his game.
     
    #34
  35. Whatsavolley?

    Whatsavolley? New User

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    UK
    This is absolutely the funniest thing I've heard all year, rallying shot? I take it you watch tennis every so often?
     
    #35
  36. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,092
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    Maria Sharapova is hot.
     
    #36
  37. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,969
    Location:
    New York
    I can't! Should I be mortified?:oops:
     
    #37
  38. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,548
    Location:
    Back from prison
    No, if your forehand is better than Moya's.
     
    #38
  39. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,969
    Location:
    New York
    Oh man! Still mortified.....
     
    #39
  40. Squall Leonheart

    Squall Leonheart Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Messages:
    223
    I apologize for the lack of clarity: I meant that any pro's shot would be vastly superior to that of an average player's.
     
    #40
  41. Vermillion

    Vermillion Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Messages:
    1,230
    MYTH BUSTED!
     
    #41
  42. rosenstar

    rosenstar Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    I believe that's only in inelastic colisions. An Elastic collision (meaning energy is lost in the process) is what happens when you hit the ball.

    Depends on what you define as an average player and what level of pro tennis. I've kept rally's going with former top 300 players, and to best explain my level, I had the oppertunity to play d1 tennis at schools in the bottom of the patriot league (lafayette and lehigh). Had I decided on one of these schools, I would have been on the bottom of the ladder. Although I can rally and maybe play a baseline game with these guys (former pros and some low current pros), I'd get slaughtered easily in a match.

    What makes any professional or high level collegiant player so good IMO is the intent behind each shot. Each shot has a specific purpose. Each point is already designed. I'm not sure how to explain it, but a 5.0/5.5 can rally with a (low level) pro but cannot compete in a match

    Some myths/unknown facts and views of mine:

    -anyone can play professional tennis, providing you can finance it. Someone with professional status is anyone who accepts a reward for winning a match.

    -EVERYONE in the top 1000 in the world is truly amazing. anyone in the top 500 is incedibly talented. everyone in the top 100 is gifted. anyone ever to get in the top ten (even if just for a week) was born to play tennis.

    -Marat Safin is not the greatest talent ever, but he is up there.

    -giving federer a 2 handed backhand, bigger frame, etc. will not win him a french open. For him to win it, he will have to out play 7 other people.

    -Federer is not having a bad year right now. It might not be as good as last year, but he's still #1 in the world and is still making semifinals. Hewitt would kill to have a year like Fed's having now

    -Davydinko is extremely talented (as others have previously said) and he rips the ball

    -Roddick is more than just a serve. saying otherwise is stupid.

    -Finally, a player's future is not decided when he's a child. See Gasquet (who again, is incedibly talented but was expected to be in feds current position) or williams sisters (no expectations). However a junior career is generally helpful.
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2008
    #42
  43. scineram

    scineram Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,234
    Location:
    Hellhole Hungary
    LOL! Well said!!!
     
    #43
  44. beedlejuice22

    beedlejuice22 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    676
    Location:
    on the baseline
    so then how do you explain for the fraying of the strings? or the stencil rubbing off? something has got to be touching the strings when you play and my guess is that its a tennis ball...
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2008
    #44
  45. DarkSephiroth

    DarkSephiroth Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    258
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Daydenko is like a poor-man's Agassi, with that timing and ability to take the ball on the rise. He's vastly underrated.
     
    #45
  46. scineram

    scineram Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,234
    Location:
    Hellhole Hungary
    No, they do not touch.
     
    #46
  47. Gundam

    Gundam Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    410
    Hahaha- this is great.:shock: Yeah, you are right. They (particles) don't make a direct contact. But isn't the manetic field/space surrounding the positrons, neutrons and electrons a part of 'matter'? If only the particles count, we, balls, tennis racquets etc wouldn't exist at all.

    I attended my last physics class LONG time ago (last century)...I might be wrong.

    Myth : Anna K is hot. I don't get it. She is not attractive at all. Never was.
     
    #47
  48. beedlejuice22

    beedlejuice22 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    676
    Location:
    on the baseline
    the TENNIS BALL touches the STRINGS when you play TENNIS. otherwise there is no explanation for vibrations, fraying strings, or stencil rubbing off. if they didnt touch at all, how would it move? they have to make contact to work.
     
    #48
  49. beedlejuice22

    beedlejuice22 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    676
    Location:
    on the baseline
    #49
  50. Vision84

    Vision84 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,655
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    You don't know much about physics do you?
     
    #50

Share This Page