Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by romeo8880, Nov 3, 2012.
Easily. I'm on board. He is phenomenal. That is all. Yes I called him Jerry.
All aboard the hype train!
Does anyone think his forehand is aesthetically very similar to federer's?
No just no. It just looks like a regular forehand.
His forehand definitely looks old school. Flat follow through, not much wrist, ball just rips through the court. If I had to pick a similar forehand i would say Sampras.
Agreed, also he uses the eastern (or strong eastern) grip, straight arm forehand, neutral stance approach shots, etc.
And actually ya, I can see some hybrid of Sampras (not the backswing) + 2002-2004 Federer's forehand in his technique.
I see more Sampras than Federer.
this time i think we are actually not hyperballing and it's true.
No it's morse Sampras style really.
I'm glad the last couple of upsets changed your mind...now is it OK for me to pick him in PPL??? P.S.: 16 points today wasn't enough to risk on my last pick so, alas I went with Llodra instead with my last pick. If you have one left over, lend it to me for the final tomorrow!
Not a surprise...his ATP profile mentions Petros as his childhood idol. Parents are both pro volleyball players...good athletic stock!
How many guys can we fit into the top 5. Everyone is putting numbers on Jano, Nishikori, Raonic and the other young guns.
Hope Jano will maintain the top 20 ranking.
We need to see more confirmation in other tournaments as well. No denying his tennis ability.....but just like Goodall says...it is the head that matters.
There have been threads like Tomic and Young being top 5. Has not happen....and may never happen.
A good run at Wimbledon and Paris. Hope he has more runs.....he like a mini Tsonga with a better backhand :lol:.
Mini and mini
I need JANOWICZ to win tomorrow to win the PPL!
his BH is precise copy of Safin.
Top 5 is a stretch but I won't be surprised if he plays second week at majors often. I wish I had seen this coming this week but I kinda left the JJ bus after he busted out of qualies at Cinci (to Matosevic), W-S (to Gulbis) and main USO (to WC Novikov). But then, everyone lost to WC Americans at the USO, no?
It'll be interesting to see if slower HC's and clay are as kind to him in '13 as grass and indoor HC have been in '12. Much to build on, not the least being confidence!
We need to see him when he's not playing great. Playing lights out doesn't justify anything.
Even tho you are sometimes a huge jacka$$, I agree with you here.
his serve up to trophy position reminds me of pete.
yes. at least he is honest in his emotions. that's absolutely normal and even necessary to give them away..
He could be a one trick pony. Top 5 is a bit overly optimistic , lets not get too carried away here. He has talent and he is playing out of his mind on a fast indoor event. How many such events are there on tour? One, this one.
Imo he is a top 20 material .
lol his emotions after the match are so different to the in match emotions , he looks sometimes like he is dont really care about the points , rock solid face and after wining matchpoint he goes like this with tears and other staff . Strange boy=)I bet he is shaking like hell during the big points but somehow manages to win them
that's how mental skills rule
indeed. lets wait for AO2013. That will be a real trial.
He could be top 5 if all tournaments are played on fast indoor surfaces.
He's got enough game to be decently ranked with good results indoors and an occasional excellent performance when he and the conditions are playing just right (Cincinnati, US Open if not windy). I'm thinking top 20 with a look at the top 10 once in a while. Of course, there are a lot of unknowns that will occur in the next few years.
what about the fact he grew up on clay?
True, he loves clay, he was playing in the final of Rolland Garros as a junior. All his challenger titles this year were on clay also.
Playing on dirt allows him some extra margin to play all those wicked droppers
not at all. safin had a beautiful BH while jerzys is kinda unorthodox. I FH is a litte strange too but he gets the job done.
I really like him too, but these "definite Top 10 or Top 5 or Slam champ" threads pop up every time a talented player beats one of the Top 4 and has a good tourney run.
He has a tremendous upside, but let's give him some time.
I think of Verkerk who almost won the French Open, but the conditions that year were optimal for him until the final when the wind came and messed with his serve. (too bad Verkerk got injured so much)
Rosset was similar, but more solid and consitent on his groundstrokes. To me Rosset is the prototype for the modern player. 6'7" with a big serve who was a baseliner when most big servers were serve and volleyers. He did not do particularly well on grass and did do well on clay.
I think Janowicz with his more go-for-broke groundstrokes will thrive on faster courts. It certainly is possible he would do well on clay like Soderling or Rosset, but I don't see the consistency yet.
People who thinks Janowicz is not top 5 clearly didn't really watch him play. He just beat five top 20 players in a row!! How many times does this happen, a qualifier destroying top 20 guys like dominos. And the way he plays is very different. He mixes up power and touch altogether. What also separates him from other tall guys is the great movement that he has. He's definitely top 5 material, but how successful he becomes will depend entirely on how he handles himself in the next few years.
I've watched most of his matches in Paris and he definitely is doing some special stuff.
But, ultimately ranking depends on what average level you can consistently maintain. I think it's way to early to be able to judge this for Janowicz. Of course, if he can keep his Paris level up consistently, he will definitely be a top player. But I don't think many people are going to argue that he can play at this level all the time. We can just look at how is is at his best, but have to see how bad he is at his worst, and how consistent he is overall.
The truth is that he plays high-risk tennis, he makes high-risk choices during points. If he isn't amazingly consistent, when he crashes, he's going to crash hard and become an unforced error king.
If he has the ability to stay consistent, than of course I see him as a top player. But we can't just look at his strokes, power, speed to decide what his future will look like without knowing if he has the talent/skill of physical and emotional consistency to support his strokes long-term.
I think he cannot manage 5 setters, he always seemed so tired.
In Paris, he just played through qualifying, also.
This guy is 6ft 8 but has footwork like Fed or Andy. He is quite athletic with footspeed, flexibility, bending and has great defense adding to his powered serves and groundstrokes. He keeps opponents on edge since he can use power or touch shots.
If mental and sponsored MONEY (appeared to be past problem) keeps him well, he will be in top 10 soon.
I thought Raonic is more athletic than Isner, Querry and Del Po but this guy, Janowicz top them all.
I think I just ovulated.
remember isner made it to the finals of a 1000 too, and he did it beating better players
What? Kohli, Cilic, MURRAY (!), Tipsy, Simon are way tougher than Isner's road to the IW final..
Beating Djokovic in a tournament he actually cared about > beating a tanking Murray.
So, the final was just what I expected to see. Like I said before, we've all seen how he plays when he's excited, winning, and his strokes are clicking. I wanted to see how he could play when he was loosing, tired, struggling. I expected him to make more unforced errors, and that's exactly what happened. Ferrer was able to stay in the points long enough to wear him down and draw out errors.
SO, in my mind, he still has a ways to go before I'm comfortable throwing the label 'top 5' on him. Top players are top players because they have great skill, endurance, shot selection, etc; but they are also top players because their 'off' days are not as bad as other's 'off' days. Even on a bad day, Federer and Nadal can usually still beat most other players, that's why they're the top for so long.
It was fun to see how well Janowicz can play this week, and Paris was !!MUCH!! more exciting because of him. But now let's see how bad he is on his off days, during a slump, when he's played as much during the year as the other top guys and he's tired. That's going to be the real measurement of how great he can be.
Um...No. This guy had to come through qualifiers to make it to the final, 7 matches in a week, that's just unheard of. Isner had a by in in the first round.
That was pure luck. The luckiest shot he ever hit in his entire life, literally. I bet he didn't even know what he what he was doing there.
I had not seen this interview yet. He does not look like the player who is able to play a tough final the next day. I guess I can understand his reaction and I actually am really happy for him, but this also gives me the feeling that he didn't believe he could do something like this. He should really believe that he can play at a high level consistently if he wants to be a top player later on. I don't know about him. I was very thrilled watching him play in Paris, it was the most exciting Masters in a long while, but if I had to bet my money on what would happen with him, I wouldn't pick him to be a top 10 player, at least not in the following 2-3 years.
Anyway, I am VERY curious as to how he will play in the Australian Open. He will actually be seeded (correct me if I'm wrong) so it's sure that his first opponents aren't Federer, Djokovic, etc. It will give him a chance to collect some points and gain some Grand Slam experience, and it gives him the opportunity to prove himself (or show that his performance last week was a fluke). Will be interesting.
Separate names with a comma.