Originally Posted by FiveO
I would suggest that rather than creating some sub-categories in some game-styles categories, it might be easier to identify certain players as employing 2 or 3 sub-categories in their games. Not enough to qualify as "true" all-court players but enough so that you can comfortably identify how they play.
This idea is growing on me, but let me be sure I understand your ... coding.
Are you suggesting that since players usually have a *primary* style ... accompanied by differing "supportive" styles ... we could actually code their styles accordingly? (If so, Sampras is the perfect choice for this -- as I agree with you, he doesn't "fit" the (too commonly afixed) label "All Courter.") To decipher your coding of Sampras' game...
Sampras: big server/s & v/net attacker... This describes Pete's primary style. But he also employed the big fh baseliner tactics ... on a secondary level.
Is this what you meant?
I also agree with all of the following....
Federer has caused me to re-think Sampras as a pure all-courter. Sampras was never willing to play defense and retrieve like Federer or Rafter and almost never drew opponents forward with short balls or drop-shots as Fed does regularly. While Sampras was more all-court than his contemporaries and predecessors, Federer simply utilizes more elements in his game than Pete did.
Yes. Federer is the "model" of the All Courter, IMO.
The same can be done with the other offensive and defensive baseline styles where a player combines elements.
Agreed ... I think. Do I accurately grasp your intent, above?
And, friends, I'd really like to keep this to current players. Of course we "old timers" can easily categorize Borg, Smith, Newk, Evert, King, etc. ... but if this methodology is to become useful, it must appeal and apply to the "modern" styles of play.