legcramp
Professional
So Shelton's hype is based on another overhyped guy in Sinner who hasn't done anything at slams yet. Got it!
Ben Shelton
- Thread starter KantenKlaar
- Start date
Purestriker
Legend
Big if true.
a10best
Legend
#1 - Grand Slam singles results: FACT Check
- Australian Open QF (2023)
-- French Open 1R (2023)
-- Wimbledon 2R (2023)
-- US Open SF (2023)
-- Australian Open 3R (2024)
#2 - Good elements ? - the immature brat attitude and handshake after losing in USO SF
- the feminine grunt on match points in this years AO?
- the wild celebrations he did playing against Foe
-- He's only proved to be disrespectful to his peers.
-- Better parenting and coaching would not allow a rookie or second year player to dis a GOAT or their fellow American.
messiahrobins
Legend
I understand ypur point , but my point is for a player who has designs on being a slam winner and an atg which i think he has the talent tomdo, he should be winning that type of match and i dont thinkmgiving jim an easy time over the loss helps him. Im from the school of hard knocks and beating him down over the loss might do the trick and take him to the next level.
Subway Tennis
G.O.A.T.
He made the QF at AO last year at his first time of trying. Also made the SF at his first US Open. They are good major results.
It’s only his second AO this year and yet a 3rd round loss feels like a disappointment because he has already set such a high standard for himself.
We all criticise the top young guys for not getting good results at Bo5, but Ben has always reserved his best tennis for the majors.
Mannarino won last night, but let’s not pretend it wasn’t an epic and very entertaining match. Mannarino is a magician but he was also very tactically clever at playing a lot of attritional extended points and I do think he out-thought Shelton. You could really see the difference in experience level and ability to manage energy levels through long matches on display.
Mannarino the marathon man. 3 five setters in a row
Federev
G.O.A.T.
Fair enough, I see your point too.
He is #16 and Adrian is #19 for a reason tho.
I’m just saying, their rankings justify a tough match either could have won.
And I guess I’m a litte bit of a sucker for the old man journeyman story. Mannarino isn’t a legend and has never won anything significant. But he’s a hard worker and has been around the block. It’s nice to see him give an up and coming star a little “not so fast young man”.
Subway Tennis
G.O.A.T.
He has only played the main draw of six majors and he has already made a SF and QF.
He plays up at the biggest events. This is a third round loss against a guy ranked just four spots below him and yet it still feels like a huge disappointment because we are used to Ben bringing it on the biggest stages.
I like Ben and as a personality. Based on your comments on #2 it sounds like you might not like Ben’s personality on court, which is fair. People like who they like and it’s a subjective thing.
messiahrobins
Legend
Take all that on board and agree about mannarino who is a superb pro so i hope i didnt come across disrespectful to him.
Im a big fan of Ben and have high expectations but of course evsrything ypunsaynis corrrect but id still be giving ben a hard time to keep him hungry tomput it right.
Federev
G.O.A.T.
Right on. All good!
yonexRx32
Professional
Oh wow .. and after that they didn't give him the title?
kl2963
Rookie
What is this google you speak of? hahaha
a10best
Legend
It's his sixth major and he has only made 1QF and 1SF. That's 2 out of 6 or 33% of the time he brings it.
His career pro W-L record is 36-31 incl. AO 24'.
okay to be fair he hasn't made loud femme grunts every match or give cold handshakes. And he hasn't had racket smashing tirades like Kyrios, Djokovic or Paire, or challenge hecklers in the stands to a fight, and he did give Mannarino a nice friendly handshake at the end. Loud obnoxious grunts are just wrong.
tommy paul made a slam final?
Subway Tennis
G.O.A.T.
Good points all round.
Sipho
Rookie
He's kind of a goofy kid to me, but his game is fun to watch.
And he's the only American that I like.
Taylor is kind of weird and boring. Tommy is kind of boring to me. Tiafoe is with Djokovic and Murray, the only players on tour that I simply cannot stand. He seems to have grown out of being a clown (or as big of a clown), but he'll forever have the unforgivable sin of having an ugly game. Korda is kind of boring to me too.
So Ben is it. He brings the fun back. His aggressive play is just a breath of fresh air.
He's in my top-three-must-see.
Arthur Fils. Dimitrov. And Ben.
Hopefully Ben can win a US Open. I think that would be great.
I like the father and son thing too. I like it with Casper Ruud and I like it here.
a10best
Legend
good catch. yep, a slam semi
a10best
Legend
I agree about Dimitrov and Fis and yea Ben does bring back aggressive play.
Does this mean you don't care to see Sinner and Alcaraz and you didn't see or like their match in Miami last year or 22 USO?
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
I already pointed all that out, but the person whining about it disappeared after bizarrely claiming Ben "brings it at majors." Then made a "rebuttal" that Shelton is ranked #16, as if that's relevant. Lendl was ranked #1 in 1983 and won 14 events, but no majors, so ranking isn't something to bring up. Ivan wasn't bringing it at majors even when ranked #1.
Non-Americans are getting really defensive about Shelton which is seriously bizarre. One tournament won at age 21 and they're acting like he's Jimbo, Mac, Agassi and Sampras rolled into one. He's seriously annoying to a lot of people, just like Zverev, Tsitsipas and Rune.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
OK, make sure you apply your standard to Rune, who was ranked #4 at age 19 and beat Djokovic in a Masters 1000 final. Remember not to "throw out trash" to an elite athlete like the Dane. That'll last about 12 days. SMH.
Talk about double standards, it's hilarious. Fed is routinely called a mug here, but the masses are supposed to respect Shelton?
Federev
G.O.A.T.
Did I dump on Rune?
I think I said he should change his name to Ruune. But that’s only cause I can’t keep straight who is who.
I don’t think I have anything against Rune. Or Ruune. Or Rude or Ruud.
In fact - I do remember being stoked when Severin joined Boris on Team Rune!
I wanna see the fruit of that coaching marriage crush it.
Sipho
Rookie
Being perfectly honest, no, those guys aren't really that exciting to me.
And yeah, I watched their Miami match. I thought it was okay. I didn't watch their US Open match though. I didn't pay that much attention to that US Open for some reason. There was no one I was all that interested in seeing.
But obviously they're the top players today, but today's tennis is a little boring to me.
And Alcaraz is kind of exciting. But if I had to choose between watching an Alcaraz match or a Ben Shelton match, I'm choosing Ben.
Weird maybe, but yeah.
(And now I know why I didn't watch the Djokovic/Alcaraz Wimbledon final. Because I simply didn't care who won. It's a little sad that it's at that state for me, but what can you do?)
Anyway, Fils plays like everyone else plays today, but he's just cool to me.
Dimitrov is obviously different and his game is beautiful. And our forehands are different, but our backhands are the same. So that's why I like him. And he's just a little bit better than me. Or maybe a whole lot.
And Ben is more or less like everyone else today too, but his crazy aggressiveness is great.
I like boring Pete Sampras. That's the kind of tennis that's exciting to me. That's not coming back though.
Ben is the closest to that. He's obviously not going to be anywhere near the player Sampras was, but he's still fun.
sortof
Professional
Quite the opposite, psychologically it can be pretty problematic to be around with your father (or parents) all the time as an adult. In a professionel setting with your father as coach it´s pretty weird actually.
Sipho
Rookie
Like with anything it's case by case. And it all comes down to the player. Like with anything.
Martina Hingis was fine as a player with her mother as her coach. And I don't know, was she ever coached by anyone else?
Venus and Serena were fine with Richard Williams as their coach and were fine without him.
And while not his father, Nadal was fine with Uncle Tony and was fine without him.
Casper Ruud was a match away from becoming the number #1 player in the world with his father as his coach, and he seems pretty well adjusted as a person now.
Ben seems fine with his father as his coach. And he got within a match of going to the US Open final, and he seems pretty well adjusted as a person now too.
Casper Ruud seems like he's going to stay with his father as his coach for his entire career. And I honestly don't think that's going to hurt his career one bit. I don't think another coach is going to make him better. He's only going to be so good.
Ben may or may not stay with his father his whole career. Whether he does or doesn't, it's not like he's going to win 10 slams anyway. He just doesn't have that kind of movement.
With someone like Tsitsipas... would he be better without his father? I don't know? Maybe? Maybe not. But #3 in the world and a couple of slams finals is not horrible.
But overall, yep, I like families together in tennis. Sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn't and goes pretty bad. Like with anything.
a10best
Legend
I get where you're coming from. Sampras was great.Being perfectly honest, no, those guys aren't really that exciting to me.
And yeah, I watched their Miami match. I thought it was okay. I didn't watch their US Open match though. I didn't pay that much attention to that US Open for some reason. There was no one I was all that interested in seeing.
But obviously they're the top players today, but today's tennis is a little boring to me.
And Alcaraz is kind of exciting. But if I had to choose between watching an Alcaraz match or a Ben Shelton match, I'm choosing Ben.
Weird maybe, but yeah.
(And now I know why I didn't watch the Djokovic/Alcaraz Wimbledon final. Because I simply didn't care who won. It's a little sad that it's at that state for me, but what can you do?)
Anyway, Fils plays like everyone else plays today, but he's just cool to me.
Dimitrov is obviously different and his game is beautiful. And our forehands are different, but our backhands are the same. So that's why I like him. And he's just a little bit better than me. Or maybe a whole lot.
And Ben is more or less like everyone else today too, but his crazy aggressiveness is great.
I like boring Pete Sampras. That's the kind of tennis that's exciting to me. That's not coming back though.
Ben is the closest to that. He's obviously not going to be anywhere near the player Sampras was, but he's still fun.
Today's boring endless baseline rallies can be a trigger to do something else.
The good thing about Sinner and Alcaraz is they aren't afraid to come to the net to end points and one has superhero speed.
Lol. I take it nobody could pay you to watch those Djokovic Murray finals, or Zverev v. Medvedev match.
messiahrobins
Legend
I put money on shelton to win uso thiz year months agomso hope you are right.
Sipho
Rookie
Yeah, Djokovic and Murray... oh, hell no.
I think I did that once... never again.
Zverev and Medvedev: I don't have a dislike for either one of those guys. It's more of a "I simply do not care."
It's kind of like last night with Rublev and De Minaur: I checked out at like 3-all in the second and went to bed. I saw this morning it went five. So it might have been a good match, but there was no way I was watching that.
And Sinner and Alacraz are fine. I have no issues with either one of them. And if either one of them wins the Australian I'm be happy for them.
It's just: staying back at the baseline; two-handed backhand, blah-blah-blah. I've just never liked that. And that goes back to day one of watching tennis and not knowing anything about tennis.
Not to date myself too much, but the first tennis I watched as a little kid was the '82 Wimbledon. In the final I somehow knew who John McEnroe was, but I had no idea who Jimmy Connors was.
Of course, I wanted Mac to win but he lost to Connors in five.
Devastation for me.
We were at a family reunion during that second week of Wimbledon and it was raining everyday, so that's why I was watching tennis because there was nothing else to do. Anyway, went back home after the reunion and I started playing tennis. And I wanted to play like John McEnroe.
The next match I remember watching was the '83 French final. Yannick Noah and Willander.
(And I remember we went to brunch after the match and I was wearing an Izod-Lacoste shirt because of Noah. Because he was French and Izod-Lacoste shirts were cool back then. And I've worn Lacoste ever since while playing tennis.)
So yeah, McEnroe, Noah... the cool people hit one-handed backhands and played serve and volley.
Two-handed backhand and staying back? Hell no. That's not cool.
Mac and Noah, they were cool, and that's how you play.
So I'm a product of my upbringing. And if I grew up at a different time I'm sure I would feel different.
EDIT:
Well, probably not. But maybe. (Well, no, not really. I wouldn't have felt different.)
Last edited:
a10best
Legend
Same here. I got into tennis by accident. A match started after an NFL game in early Sept. and I've been hooked ever since I was a teen and then became very good at the game.
- Agree on coolness of 1hbh. That's why I have Stan as my photo. His 1hbh is the greatest to me. I don't like Gasquet's or Fed's because it breaks down although Fed's slice is the greatest, better than Edbergs. I heard from our top SoCal pro who played Pete as a teen that as a 15-16 yr old teen Pete had a 2hbh and then switched to a 1hbh.
Ben has room to improve a few shots which could help the U.S. have an American male slam champ again.
- Agree on coolness of 1hbh. That's why I have Stan as my photo. His 1hbh is the greatest to me. I don't like Gasquet's or Fed's because it breaks down although Fed's slice is the greatest, better than Edbergs. I heard from our top SoCal pro who played Pete as a teen that as a 15-16 yr old teen Pete had a 2hbh and then switched to a 1hbh.
Ben has room to improve a few shots which could help the U.S. have an American male slam champ again.
Last edited:
Sipho
Rookie
Yeah, I think Sampras switched at like 12 or 13, but whenever, he did used to have a two-hander.
I think he said he switched because his coach at the time wanted him to win Wimbledon, and he thought it was best to have a one-handed backhand to win Wimbledon.
Sampras was one of the top juniors in California at that time, but when he switched he started losing. He stuck with it though, and seven Wimbledon's later it worked out fine.
Stefan Edberg also had a two-handed backhand when he was younger. His switch worked out fine too. And he was a great junior with his one-handed backhand. He won the junior calendar grand slam. The only player to ever do that.
And Edberg was another one of those guys. In that, this is how all of the cool guys played, so this is how I want to play too.
And I like Stan's backhand too. It was always fun to go out and hit and do the "Wawrinka." Cross-court, cross-court, cross-court... down the line. That's Stan. You know it's coming. You can see it coming. There's nothing you can do about it though.
And yeah, I don't really like Federer's and Gasquet's backhand either. If you're going to get into baseline rallies today, you can't have a one-handed backhand like that.
You can beat the guys that you're simply a better tennis player than, but the other guys that are your equal... I don't like your chances.
Stan's way of just straight-up bullying you is the way to go. And like Dominic Thiem. Thiem also had a two-hander growing up and switched.
One thing about Thiem: I remember when Federer was starting to decline I went and looked at the junior rankings to see if any top juniors hit one-handers. I think Thiem was like 3 or 4 in the juniors at that time. So I was thinking, well, maybe he'll be good. And of course he was, but injuries.
One thing about one-handed backhands, I believe I read somewhere that you can hit the ball harder with a one-handed backhand. In terms of pace, in terms of miles per hour. And hit with more topspin. Hit a heavier ball.
I know I can hit the ball harder with a one-handed backhand than a two. But of course I don't really know how to hit a two-handed backhand. But seeing what Stan does... I can believe that you can hit the ball harder with a one-hander.
Obviously balls at shoulder-height is hell with a one-hander. And that's why the good lord invented serving and volleying.
So if you hit a one-hander in today's game, you better be serving and volleying. Unless you're Stan or something.
As for Ben, yeah, he can of course win a US Open. Possibly a Wimbledon too.
a10best
Legend
Stefan had a 2hbh. hmm, I never would've guessed that.Yeah, I think Sampras switched at like 12 or 13, but whenever, he did used to have a two-hander.
I think he said he switched because his coach at the time wanted him to win Wimbledon, and he thought it was best to have a one-handed backhand to win Wimbledon.
Sampras was one of the top juniors in California at that time, but when he switched he started losing. He stuck with it though, and seven Wimbledon's later it worked out fine.
Stefan Edberg also had a two-handed backhand when he was younger. His switch worked out fine too. And he was a great junior with his one-handed backhand. He won the junior calendar grand slam. The only player to ever do that.
And Edberg was another one of those guys. In that, this is how all of the cool guys played, so this is how I want to play too.
And I like Stan's backhand too. It was always fun to go out and hit and do the "Wawrinka." Cross-court, cross-court, cross-court... down the line. That's Stan. You know it's coming. You can see it coming. There's nothing you can do about it though.
And yeah, I don't really like Federer's and Gasquet's backhand either. If you're going to get into baseline rallies today, you can't have a one-handed backhand like that.
You can beat the guys that you're simply a better tennis player than, but the other guys that are your equal... I don't like your chances.
Stan's way of just straight-up bullying you is the way to go. And like Dominic Thiem. Thiem also had a two-hander growing up and switched.
One thing about Thiem: I remember when Federer was starting to decline I went and looked at the junior rankings to see if any top juniors hit one-handers. I think Thiem was like 3 or 4 in the juniors at that time. So I was thinking, well, maybe he'll be good. And of course he was, but injuries.
One thing about one-handed backhands, I believe I read somewhere that you can hit the ball harder with a one-handed backhand. In terms of pace, in terms of miles per hour. And hit with more topspin. Hit a heavier ball.
I know I can hit the ball harder with a one-handed backhand than a two. But of course I don't really know how to hit a two-handed backhand. But seeing what Stan does... I can believe that you can hit the ball harder with a one-hander.
Obviously balls at shoulder-height is hell with a one-hander. And that's why the good lord invented serving and volleying.
So if you hit a one-hander in today's game, you better be serving and volleying. Unless you're Stan or something.
As for Ben, yeah, he can of course win a US Open. Possibly a Wimbledon too.
Since you've seen the natural S&V players and attacking style of Stefan/Pete do think Ben has a good enough fh volley naturally for his age?
I don't think so from the matches I've seen him play, especially that 5th set crucial fh volley sprayed long (30-all) against Mannarino. Pete and Edberg at that age wouldn't miss that.
Sipho
Rookie
His forehand volley is okay, I guess.
His backhand volley seems to be better. But his forehand volley is okay.
The forehand volley is a more difficult shot to hit, I think. And I think most people have a better backhand volley than a forehand one. So I can't be too critical of Ben's.
Of course, with someone like Edberg, his game was serving and volleying. And he was one of the best to ever do it. And he was number #1 in the world in singles and doubles. So he knew how to volley.
And while Sampras' game wasn't serve and volley to the extent that Edberg's was, it was serve and volley first the majority of the time, and stay back second.
So their games were pretty much built on hitting volleys.
With Ben, I would be hesitant to say that the volley is that crucial to his game. It's important, but not like it was to Sampras' game. And certainly not to the extent it was to Edberg's.
Also, Edberg won his first grand slam at 19. As did Sampras. So it's not really a fair comparison. They're all-time great players.
a10best
Legend
It's not crucial to win a 500 event. To win a slam where close sets are decided by a few points (Djokovic/Med USO 23') your volley cannot be that weak.His forehand volley is okay, I guess.
His backhand volley seems to be better. But his forehand volley is okay.
The forehand volley is a more difficult shot to hit, I think. And I think most people have a better backhand volley than a forehand one. So I can't be too critical of Ben's.
Of course, with someone like Edberg, his game was serving and volleying. And he was one of the best to ever do it. And he was number #1 in the world in singles and doubles. So he knew how to volley.
And while Sampras' game wasn't serve and volley to the extent that Edberg's was, it was serve and volley first the majority of the time, and stay back second.
So their games were pretty much built on hitting volleys.
With Ben, I would be hesitant to say that the volley is that crucial to his game. It's important, but not like it was to Sampras' game. And certainly not to the extent it was to Edberg's.
Also, Edberg won his first grand slam at 19. As did Sampras. So it's not really a fair comparison. They're all-time great players.
Nadal and Djokovic improved their volley skills multiple levels. Djokovic used to be very avg. volleyer until he hired Becker and then Goran.
Ben played No. 5 singles for the Gators and doubles. and he's played doubles with Chris Eubanks last year.
So all I'm saying is that Ben's fh volley for his "style of game" needs to be much better in crucial moments than it currently is in order to win a slam due to Sinner and Alcaraz who have better volleys than Ben.
You gotta be able to execute a FH volley from a routine flat shot sitter by Mannarino. Of course the miss could've been from the lights, camera flash, sun, or someone entering the arena that threw him off, I don't know. The thing is I've seen him do this quite a few times and lose service games up 40-0 which he did in the 5th set.
Edberg & Sampras may not be a fair comparison in hindsight but we did not know at age 19 they'd win multiple slams. Injuries could've stopped them like Delpo. Perhaps Soderling or Taylor Dent could've snuck in a slam win too. We inserted them Stefan and Pete into the discussion because they're attack style players with a very good serve like Ben. I didn't want to use Isner (due to foot speed and lack of groundies). I guess we can compare him to Fritz as each has a big serve but Fritz lacks the movement. Bottomline, if Ben improves securing his 40-0 leads in games to wins 95% of the time, cleans up some ue's and improves that fh volley he can do it with ease and probably get a few commercials.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Do you enjoy Thiem and/or Djokovic? lol
Rovesciarete
Hall of Fame
Shelton attacks the net more than almost all the player but his success rate is in the lower third of the top50. I think he underestimates the quality of the passing shots and needs to get used to them.
tennis24x7
Hall of Fame
You did date yourself. Those days of going to the net for everything are all but over. Fed learned that the hardway in the RG final against Nadal.Yeah, Djokovic and Murray... oh, hell no.
I think I did that once... never again.
Zverev and Medvedev: I don't have a dislike for either one of those guys. It's more of a "I simply do not care."
It's kind of like last night with Rublev and De Minaur: I checked out at like 3-all in the second and went to bed. I saw this morning it went five. So it might have been a good match, but there was no way I was watching that.
And Sinner and Alacraz are fine. I have no issues with either one of them. And if either one of them wins the Australian I'm be happy for them.
It's just: staying back at the baseline; two-handed backhand, blah-blah-blah. I've just never liked that. And that goes back to day one of watching tennis and not knowing anything about tennis.
Not to date myself too much, but the first tennis I watched as a little kid was the '82 Wimbledon. In the final I somehow knew who John McEnroe was, but I had no idea who Jimmy Connors was.
Of course, I wanted Mac to win but he lost to Connors in five.
Devastation for me.
We were at a family reunion during that second week of Wimbledon and it was raining everyday, so that's why I was watching tennis because there was nothing else to do. Anyway, went back home after the reunion and I started playing tennis. And I wanted to play like John McEnroe.
The next match I remember watching was the '83 French final. Yannick Noah and Willander.
(And I remember we went to brunch after the match and I was wearing an Izod-Lacoste shirt because of Noah. Because he was French and Izod-Lacoste shirts were cool back then. And I've worn Lacoste ever since while playing tennis.)
So yeah, McEnroe, Noah... the cool people hit one-handed backhands and played serve and volley.
Two-handed backhand and staying back? Hell no. That's not cool.
Mac and Noah, they were cool, and that's how you play.
So I'm a product of my upbringing. And if I grew up at a different time I'm sure I would feel different.
EDIT:
Well, probably not. But maybe. (Well, no, not really. I wouldn't have felt different.)
a10best
Legend
Thiem would never grunt on match point only during putting gel in his hair.
Djokovic grunted pretty loud after a duel to the death with a heckler who succumbed to his injuries by a racket. A witness said he saw a man in tight blue shorts wildly swinging a racket at a guy with no shirt.
Last edited:
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
Will he beat Novak at wimbledon this year and hangup the phone on him and send him into retirement ??
a10best
Legend
Ben should bring a prop onto the court next to his bench. A big red phone. or even better a British phone booth and if he shockingly wins, go in the phone booth and hang up. That'll bring some exposure to the game for sure.
coolcamden
Hall of Fame
And then he wakes up.
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
that would be hillarious.... Novak may get so mad, he may throw punch at him right there on the court....
Sipho
Rookie
Yeah, I don't disagree with any of that.
With Ben, I think he's obviously a good player. He's fun to watch. I like watching him play.
In regard to that Mannarino match: I noticed during the fourth set Ben was strutting a little and trying to be a little too crafty at times, and it cost him. And now he was in a fifth set. And so, yeah, you're in a close situation and mistakes can happen. You can miss things like forehand volleys.
I just chalk it up as: live and learn. Keep your head down and just play the match and close it out.
Overall, yeah, Ben may win a US Open or a Wimbledon. I'm guessing he'll be a solid top-10 player. Beyond that though... yeah, he is who he is.
And yes, Taylor Dent. He was fun too. I never thought he was going to win anything. But he was fun to watch.
I remember Patrick McEnroe once saying that his game was "rude." And it was, it was fun.
Going to the net is not Federer's game.
It's just something that he can do, but it's not his game.
That's why I was never in love with Federer. I so desperately wanted to like him, but he just did not play like I wanted to see.
He of course played that way that he wanted to play, but not the way I wanted him to play.
I wanted a serve and volleyer, but that's not who Federer was. He was an aggressive baseliner who could serve and volley. And when he did serve and volley, it was readily apparent that that was not something that was as natural as breathing to him. I was just something that he could do.
As for going to the net today, I think it can be done.
If Ben was just a little bit better I think he could pull it off. You just have to be a little more precise today.
And with poly strings theoretically I don't see why you couldn't pull it off.
The thing is, no one grows up playing like that anymore. Everyone grinds, no one attacks.
If you had 20 or 30 people who played like Ben, then we would see some different results. But Ben and maybe only another handful of people attack like that. So it's a numbers game.
a10best
Legend
@Subway Tennis you were right. Ben does bring it in slams according to the stats/analytics.
Scroll down and look at 1st serve percentage points won and 2nd serve percent won in slams.
Look at Match Charting Project for strokes. - Awesome tool
Scroll down and look at 1st serve percentage points won and 2nd serve percent won in slams.
Look at Match Charting Project for strokes. - Awesome tool
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, I don't disagree with any of that.
With Ben, I think he's obviously a good player. He's fun to watch. I like watching him play.
In regard to that Mannarino match: I noticed during the fourth set Ben was strutting a little and trying to be a little too crafty at times, and it cost him. And now he was in a fifth set. And so, yeah, you're in a close situation and mistakes can happen. You can miss things like forehand volleys.
I just chalk it up as: live and learn. Keep your head down and just play the match and close it out.
Overall, yeah, Ben may win a US Open or a Wimbledon. I'm guessing he'll be a solid top-10 player. Beyond that though... yeah, he is who he is.
And yes, Taylor Dent. He was fun too. I never thought he was going to win anything. But he was fun to watch.
I remember Patrick McEnroe once saying that his game was "rude." And it was, it was fun.
Going to the net is not Federer's game.
It's just something that he can do, but it's not his game.
That's why I was never in love with Federer. I so desperately wanted to like him, but he just did not play like I wanted to see.
He of course played that way that he wanted to play, but not the way I wanted him to play.
I wanted a serve and volleyer, but that's not who Federer was. He was an aggressive baseliner who could serve and volley. And when he did serve and volley, it was readily apparent that that was not something that was as natural as breathing to him. I was just something that he could do.
As for going to the net today, I think it can be done.
If Ben was just a little bit better I think he could pull it off. You just have to be a little more precise today.
And with poly strings theoretically I don't see why you couldn't pull it off.
The thing is, no one grows up playing like that anymore. Everyone grinds, no one attacks.
If you had 20 or 30 people who played like Ben, then we would see some different results. But Ben and maybe only another handful of people attack like that. So it's a numbers game.
Martina said once that if you're not getting passed a ton you're not coming to the net enough.
But today players aren't going to just give away points like that. Djoko is the most successful player in history and he wins by playing the percentages, never going for too much, and certainly not by giving points away with compulsive trips to the net.
a10best
Legend
ahhh he would be flaunting like McGregor or some WWE superstar. It's good for the game and ticket prices. Of course the opposing player would need to be cool with it.
Last edited:
KantenKlaar
Hall of Fame
Ben again. Let's see what happens.
Similar threads
