Tomic worst athlete ever?

[pvaudio]

I retract that. BOTH vision and skill are gifted. Only strategy can be learned.

[always_crosscourt]

Originally Posted by Goosehead

no it dosnt..just because someone is fast, muscular, strong, or superfit dosnt mean they will be good at any particular sport.

They will be good at any sport they apply themselves to.

The athleticism is key, skills can be learned.

[Vrad]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

It's the opposite - why do you think the NFL recruits based almost exclusively on stats such as 40 yard dash, max squat, max deadlift, 225 bench press test and vertical jump height?

It's because they know that these qualities are the most important aspects of any sport. Select athletes that are good at these, and the rest will follow. Skills, tactics and vision are secondary and can always be developed later.

Lol at comparing tennis players with the NFL.

Here's a thought experiment. Place one of those 300 pound linemen on a tennis court, against the 100th ranked women's player, who do you think wins?

Also, your own NFL example actually completely destroys your argument. Which is the most important position in the NFL? I think pretty much everyone would agree it's the QB. You really think Peyton Manning is running sub 5s 40 yard dash at any time? Arguably the best NFL player in the NFL right now is not even close to being the best athlete in the NFL (or even a good athlete for that matter).

[corners]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

That is only the fault of the pathetic pool of talent that tennis has to draw from where all the best go to the NFL and NBA, and tennis gets the leftovers who couldn't have made it in any other sport.

John McEnroe would never have been allowed to dominate in the manner he did if tennis took the best athletes, because then it wouldn't be long before a player came along who had volleys just as deft as his, but with the athleticism of an NFL wide receiver to go with it - and McEnroe would have gotten thrashed.

It makes me sick how everyone thinks Nadal is such a great athlete, when, compared to athletes of pretty much any other sport, he would be flat out appalling in any of those basic indicators of athleticism (bench, dead, squat, vert jump, 40 yard dash) I listed.

I'm not sure how great an athlete Nadal is compared to the top players in the NFL and NBA, let alone the various football leagues around the world. But neither do you. Can Nadal run a 4.4 40? I'm inclined to doubt it, but I don't know; he might be that fast. But is he the greatest athlete in the world, in terms of measureable speed, power and agility? Certainly not, and I doubt he would make the world top 100.

But dismissing athletes like John McEnroe just because he's small, slightly built and not the fastest man alive is a mistake, IMHO. I kind of think of tennis as a point guard's game - the skill set is similar and so is the body size. Some of the NBA's best point guards have been 6'2", just like the current top 3 in tennis. People like to say that LeBron, trained, would be the greatest tennis player in the world. But would he be the best point guard in the world? I think he's too big, and he may be too big for tennis too. And consider: the best athlete, in terms of measurables, is not necessarily the best point guard. Think of guys like John Stockton, Steve Nash, Isaiah Thomas. Wonderful athletes, but nothing like LeBron, Jordan or Iverson in terms of jaw-dropping athletic prowess. But yet, Stockton, Nash and Thomas are all hall of fame point guards because they have more than just measureable explosive athletic talent. They've got other stuff. And tennis greatness depends a lot on other stuff.

Would Michael Jordan have been a greater tennis player than Fed? He was certainly a more explosive athlete. But did he have Fed's hand-eye, his touch? Jordan's baseball career suggests not.

I agree that tennis has never seen a true, one in billion super-athlete, but that doesn't mean that the greats of our sport are a bunch of chumps and clods either. On the other hand, when a guy who can run a 4.3 forty and jump 48 inches, who also happens to have feel and touch, a talent for emotional control in prolonged one-on-one contests, along with world-class hand-eye, decides to play tennis the sport will be changed, that's for sure. But that athlete might never come.

[Vrad]

Originally Posted by pvaudio

I retract that. BOTH vision and skill are gifted. Only strategy can be learned.

I don't completely agree that it is gifted. However, while I do think some are born with it, I believe it is possible for many people to learn vision and skill when they are young.

After a certain age, I doubt it happens.

[Vrad]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

That is only the fault of the pathetic pool of talent that tennis has to draw from where all the best go to the NFL and NBA, and tennis gets the leftovers who couldn't have made it in any other sport.

That may rank amongst the stupidest things I have heard all week. Okay, I might give you the NBA, but the NFL recruits from a larger talent pool?

You mean the sport which outside America no one even understands or knows exists?

Tennis recruits from the entire world. Football recruits from a small minority of Americans whose parents were either not rich enough, or too stupid to prevent their kids from playing a sport which is likely to lead to dementia at the age of 50.

How many Spanish, British, Swiss, Chinese, Indian, Australian players do you see in the NFL?

[Vrad]

Originally Posted by corners

People like to say that LeBron, trained, would be the greatest tennis player in the world. But would he be the best point guard in the world? I think he's too big, and he may be too big for tennis too.

Well said. Lebron would be an Isner type tennis player. His legs would struggle to carry his huge body through 5 (or even 3) sets.

[t135]

Originally Posted by Sid_Vicious

That is absolutely absurd. Tomic's movement is horrendous compared to Federer's. Tomic is simply not among the "great" movers on tour like Djokovic, Murray,Nadal, Ferrer etc.

With that said, he is not even close to being the worst athlete ever. BeHappy is probably trolling agin.

Maybe great isn't the right word. You're right. Top 30 is a big flipping deal, you don't awkwardly luck into that. He's an excellent mover on court...not great.

[corners]

Originally Posted by Vrad

Well said. Lebron would be an Isner type tennis player. His legs would struggle to carry his huge body through 5 (or even 3) sets.

Well, I don't know about that. I think Lebron would be a good deal better than Isner. The biggest knock on Isner is that he's slow and not particularly agile. LeBron moves much better than any 6'6"+ ATP guy. And he runs up and down the court pretty well, night in and night out, so I'm not sure stamina would be a big issue. Even average athletes like Isner and Karlovic have success on tour. Big + Live Serving Arm = top 50 ranking. I reckon Lebron would have been an awesome tennis player, but I think that Steve Nash or Isaiah Thomas would have been better. But I could be wrong.

[LarryZhang]

he moves quite well, not fast, but the steps are efficient

but this guy is a bit arrogant...

[joeri888]

Maybe you sometimes just arent talented for a sport. A great sense of how a ball moves and great eyes and stuff. Its a gift as well. Athleticism is a gift as well but also training can make up for talent to a high degree. In Tomic case, i think it is easier to improve pfysically than technically.

[Vrad]

Originally Posted by corners

Well, I don't know about that. I think Lebron would be a good deal better than Isner. The biggest knock on Isner is that he's slow and not particularly agile. LeBron moves much better than any 6'6"+ ATP guy. And he runs up and down the court pretty well, night in and night out, so I'm not sure stamina would be a big issue. Even average athletes like Isner and Karlovic have success on tour. Big + Live Serving Arm = top 50 ranking. I reckon Lebron would have been an awesome tennis player, but I think that Steve Nash or Isaiah Thomas would have been better. But I could be wrong.

I think the style of running required for tennis is very different than the style needed for basketball. Tennis requires a lot of sideways running with a ton of sliding. Basketball is less switching directions and mostly moving in 1 direction.

I do think Lebron would be better than Isner, but I think he would look very much like a better Isner. He wouldn't look very agile on a tenni court.

Your example of Steve Nash is very good. I do think he'd be a better tennis player because he has the ability to switch directions on a whim, which is enabled by his lower body mass which means you have less momentum (again, I think that would really hurt Lebron's agility on a tennis court)

Regarding Lebron's fitness, I don't believe Lebron would last a tennis match. That being said, he is a tremendous athlete, and if he was a tennis player, his training regimen would be different which would make him capable of playing a complete game from start to finish.

[RAFA2005RG]

Originally Posted by Legend of Borg

I feel like the Tomic mania is going too far.

Someone needs to put the kid in a dumpster.

Like it or not, apart from the French Open, Tomic has a very good shot of winning all the slams, from 2014 onwards. He may even have a shot at one of them this year. Probably will be a finalist this year somewhere, or semi-finalist at worst.

[Wilander Fan]

Tennis has been more about skill than athleticism. An average athlete with great training would destroy a great athlete with average training. However, the slower courts reverse this trend.

[Masayoshi]

Originally Posted by RAFA2005RG

Like it or not, apart from the French Open, Tomic has a very good shot of winning all the slams, from 2014 onwards. He may even have a shot at one of them this year. Probably will be a finalist this year somewhere, or semi-finalist at worst.

That's a bold prediction, considering the top 4 are still a very tough nut to crack, and the ones just outside (Del Po et al) are not much softer. I could see a slam semi-final this year if things fall just right, but I wouldn't put money on it. Wouldn't mind being wrong, though.

[RAFA2005RG]

Originally Posted by Masayoshi

That's a bold prediction, considering the top 4 are still a very tough nut to crack, and the ones just outside (Del Po et al) are not much softer. I could see a slam semi-final this year if things fall just right, but I wouldn't put money on it. Wouldn't mind being wrong, though.

Almost there in 2011, he lost to Djokovic in Wimbledon QF So he is just a bit of mental maturity away from going to a semi or final. Tomic actually fell asleep for a potion of that QF vs Djokovic, and lost 7-5 in 4th set.

[TennisLovaLova]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Of any ATP top 100 professional that is.

110mph serve and he cannot move.

[RodSmooth]

Originally Posted by Wilander Fan

Tennis has been more about skill than athleticism. An average athlete with great training would destroy a great athlete with average training. However, the slower courts reverse this trend.

No they don't, just look at monfils.

[Relinquis]

the NFL and NBA comments are amusing. the reason the US doesn't have a top 10 tennis player is because you guys don't teach the backhand anymore. look at your current top male pros. they have dink/WTA type backhands. Now compare to the Spaniard ATP pros, even one-handers like AlMagro. you can't cover the court effectively if you have to run around every backhand.

tomic is going to be interesting to watch over the next few years. i dislike his personality; the unjustified arrogance and the solipsism/self-centredness are high even by tennis player standards. But he does have 'touch' and a distinctive playing style. he's going to be a wonderful player to hate if he gets his act together on the court. this will be good for tennis in an age where every player is supposed to corporate friendly and sing/dance to gagnam style or whatever it's called. (tipsy resists a bit and keeps it real here: http://youtu.be/yGXYVtXXgmk?t=1m49s )

he's very, very young. just a baby really. he has a lot of potential if he gets some discipline.

[heninfan99]

Iverson would have been the GOAT if he played tennis despite his love of practice.

Originally Posted by Vrad

I think the style of running required for tennis is very different than the style needed for basketball. Tennis requires a lot of sideways running with a ton of sliding. Basketball is less switching directions and mostly moving in 1 direction.

I do think Lebron would be better than Isner, but I think he would look very much like a better Isner. He wouldn't look very agile on a tenni court.

Your example of Steve Nash is very good. I do think he'd be a better tennis player because he has the ability to switch directions on a whim, which is enabled by his lower body mass which means you have less momentum (again, I think that would really hurt Lebron's agility on a tennis court)

Regarding Lebron's fitness, I don't believe Lebron would last a tennis match. That being said, he is a tremendous athlete, and if he was a tennis player, his training regimen would be different which would make him capable of playing a complete game from start to finish.