Jo Konta loses 5th straight match

George Turner

George Turner

Hall of Fame
6-1 6-2 to some random with a slice forehand.

Here in Britain the media have been hyping Konta as a future no.1 and Grand Slam Champion. The British media do like to overhype things.

Nevertheless, what's going on with Konta? Has her confidence gone? Can she get it back?
 
Dang. Feels fairly recently she was playing like one of the best in the world. How many matches has she won since W? Any?
 
how unreachable is spadea ?...... :eek:

spadeatee.jpg
 
George Turner said:
6-1 6-2 to some random with a slice forehand.
Click to expand...
Ha! As soon as I read "slice forehand" I knew it was Niculescu. I don't watch much pro tennis but she is by far my favorite WTA player. Junky slice FH, moonballs, dropshots, lobs, but... she can crank her BH and, bizarrely, has a really nice traditional FH passing shot using a semi-western grip (why she doesn't use this FH more in baseline exchanges I have no idea). Probably one of the fastest WTA players and so much fun to watch. Most of the other women (and men, for that matter) bore me to tears with their unwatchable robotic games.
 
navigator said:
Ha! As soon as I read "slice forehand" I knew it was Niculescu. I don't watch much pro tennis but she is by far my favorite WTA player. Junky slice FH, moonballs, dropshots, lobs, but... she can crank her BH and, bizarrely, has a really nice traditional FH passing shot using a semi-western grip (why she doesn't use this FH more in baseline exchanges I have no idea). Probably one of the fastest WTA players and so much fun to watch. Most of the other women (and men, for that matter) bore me to tears with their unwatchable robotic games.
Click to expand...

She sounds like a female santoro.

She also sounds like the sort of player you don't want to play when low on confidence. Had never heard of her before but it's nice to hear of someone who plays a bit differently :)
 
Jo has been producing some good stuff recently and is the 1st British woman player to break into the top 10 for more than 30 years. But I fear she suffers from the chronic British disease of wilting under the pressure of expectation like almost every other British player with potential that you can care to name. Only Murray has managed to buck this trend but he is the spectacular exception to what has been a grim rule for British tennis players. Jo has only been British for the last 5 or 6 years but even she now seems to be feeling and wilting under the same pressures that have seen premature ends to the careers of many other British players over the years.

I hope that she can buck the trend and get back on her feet again. Sounds as if she may need a change of coach or change of something at any rate.
 
George Turner said:
She sounds like a female santoro.

She also sounds like the sort of player you don't want to play when low on confidence. Had never heard of her before but it's nice to hear of someone who plays a bit differently :)
Click to expand...

She doesn't have the touch or pure shot-making that Santoro had (or "has" - he still plays senior tennis) but, yeah, for the WTA I guess you could say she's Santoro-esque. Also, a great rebuke to those who over-emphasize the importance of technique.
 
Mainad said:
Jo has been producing some good stuff recently and is the 1st British woman player to break into the top 10 for more than 30 years. But I fear she suffers from the chronic British disease of wilting under the pressure of expectation like almost every other British player with potential that you can care to name. Only Murray has managed to buck this trend but he is the spectacular exception to what has been a grim rule for British tennis players. Jo has only been British for the last 5 or 6 years but even she now seems to be feeling and wilting under the same pressures that have seen premature ends to the careers of many other British players over the years.

I hope that she can buck the trend and get back on her feet again. Sounds as if she may need a change of coach or change of something at any rate.
Click to expand...

It is ridiculous the bookies made her the favorite to win Wimbledon this year. Even with it being wide open, and she certainly had a shot of winning along with a good half dozen others minimum, she has done nothing that justified making her the favorite. She had never made a slam final, and there were numerous Wimbledon winners, slam winners, and past Wimbledon finalists still in the draw. And that put lots of pressure on her, which isnt fair to place on her. To her credit she did play quite well to make the semis before falling to a hot Venus.

It reminds me of how the bookies made Murray the favorite for some slams as early as 2009 when he had done nothing to warrant that, and probably placed undue pressure on him as well. It is British bias (the bookies are mostly British) and they dont realize they are hindering the players, not helping them.
 
deacsyoga said:
It is ridiculous the bookies made her the favorite to win Wimbledon this year. Even with it being wide open, and she certainly had a shot of winning along with a good half dozen others minimum, she has done nothing that justified making her the favorite. She had never made a slam final, and there were numerous Wimbledon winners, slam winners, and past Wimbledon finalists still in the draw. And that put lots of pressure on her, which isnt fair to place on her. To her credit she did play quite well to make the semis before falling to a hot Venus.
Click to expand...

She also seemed to fall for the hype a little and talked up her own ambitions maybe a bit too much instead of just knuckling down, keeping her focus and getting on with it.

deacsyoga said:
It reminds me of how the bookies made Murray the favorite for some slams as early as 2009 when he had done nothing to warrant that, and probably placed undue pressure on him as well. It is British bias (the bookies are mostly British) and they dont realize they are hindering the players, not helping them.
Click to expand...

That particular hype started because, after losing to Federer in his maiden Slam final at the 2008 USO, he then beat him in their next 2 encounters (in the semis of Madrid and in his debut appearance at the WTF). The British press got over excited and thought that Murray had turned the tables on Fed and would likely beat him at the AO as well hence their dubbing of him as the favourite! Both Federer and Djokovic, the defending champion, had some suitably witty put downs on hand when they got to learn of this.

Something I don't feel Murray is given enough credit for by fans and detractors alike is how he himself never bought into all the hype and hoopla. He just ignored it and kept his head down and maintained his own focus and counsel. Eventually he fulfilled almost every expectation the overly excitable press had about him but he did it his own way and not by talking to them. He is very much a role model for other British players in this aspect as much as anything else.
 
Mainad said:
She also seemed to fall for the hype a little and talked up her own ambitions maybe a bit too much instead of just knuckling down, keeping her focus and getting on with it.

That particular hype started because, after losing to Federer in his maiden Slam final at the 2008 USO, he then beat him in their next 2 encounters (in the semis of Madrid and in his debut appearance at the WTF). The British press got over excited and thought that Murray had turned the tables on Fed and would likely beat him at the AO as well hence their dubbing of him as the favourite! Both Federer and Djokovic, the defending champion, had some suitably witty put downs on hand when they got to learn of this.

Something I don't feel Murray is given enough credit for by fans and detractors alike is how he himself never bought into all the hype and hoopla. He just ignored it and kept his head down and maintained his own focus and counsel. Eventually he fulfilled almost every expectation the overly excitable press had about him but he did it his own way and not by talking to them. He is very much a role model for other British players in this aspect as much as anything else.
Click to expand...

Agree on all of that and I agree Konta believe his own press too much. Murray while he didnt perform up to potential in some of the early big matches, that is ateast one criticsm I wouldnt give him. He stayed grounded and focused, and Jo needs to do the same and not delude herself she is this great she hasnt yet proven to be yet.
 
Remember prior to Konta's breakthrough she used to suffer from confidence issues, lets up this losing streak is snapped asap.
 
she certainly can win a slam, but yeah some rough patch she is on now, its part of the game, seems like a hard time since falling in wimbledon, goes to show how tough it is for the british to get back together after that
 
What is the British media doing? Any player that comes through and breaks into the top 20 under the age of 25 is instantly a slam winner and future no. 1 in their book. Bottom line, she isn’t that good. All the top 5 women right now are better than her. She isn’t even ****ing British lol.

Just don’t listen to the media, especially not the British media. They tend to get too far ahead of themselves, which also includes “Andy Murray to dominate sport for years, surpass 10 slam mark.”
 
I watched Konta's semi against Venus at Wimbledon. Konta hit every shot flat and as hard as she could. Venus nullified her by hitting with enough cover to keep the ball in play, and with a low margin for error Konta misses after a few shots if she doesn't strike a winner. It's easy to see how Konta could go right off in terms of level if her confidence slips. In that respect Konta is a bit of a prototype for the dominant style on the WTA and why so many players crash and burn after looking like world beaters.
 
Mainad said:
...Jo has only been British for the last 5 or 6 year...
Click to expand...
The first time I heard her talk I thought: she sounds like an Aussie. LMAO at countries who adopt players who spent almost their entire life being developed elsewhere. Greg Rusedski did it - he was already a top player for Canada then suddenly became British when he realised he'd get more support there. Then Cameron Norrie recently, born in South Africa and spent his formative tennis years in NZ suddenly became British when he realised he'd get more funding/support.

Is the UK strategy to fund foreigners to achieve their tennis success? If so, I guess it's sort of working.
 
Bobby Jr said:
The first time I heard her talk I thought: she sounds like an Aussie. LMAO at countries who adopt players who spent almost their entire life being developed elsewhere. Greg Rusedski did it - he was already a top player for Canada then suddenly became British when he realised he'd get more support there. Then Cameron Norrie recently, born in South Africa and spent his formative tennis years in NZ suddenly became British when he realised he'd get more funding/support.

Is the UK strategy to fund foreigners to achieve their tennis success? If so, I guess it's sort of working.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware there is a deliberate strategy by the LTA to adopt foreign-born players but they will certainly give encouragement to any promising ones who seek their support. Examples in recent years apart from Rusedski include Laura Robson (Australian-born but grew up in the UK) ), Jo Konta (Australian born of Hungarian parents), Kyle Edmund (South-African born but grew up in the UK) , Cameron Norrie (South African born to British parents). Konta is the only one who did not have any kind of British connection prior to arriving in the UK.

Of course, other countries do the same but there may be a higher proportion of them in the UK at the moment.
 
deacsyoga said:
It is ridiculous the bookies made her the favorite to win Wimbledon this year. Even with it being wide open, and she certainly had a shot of winning along with a good half dozen others minimum, she has done nothing that justified making her the favorite. She had never made a slam final, and there were numerous Wimbledon winners, slam winners, and past Wimbledon finalists still in the draw. And that put lots of pressure on her, which isnt fair to place on her. To her credit she did play quite well to make the semis before falling to a hot Venus.

It reminds me of how the bookies made Murray the favorite for some slams as early as 2009 when he had done nothing to warrant that, and probably placed undue pressure on him as well. It is British bias (the bookies are mostly British) and they dont realize they are hindering the players, not helping them.
Click to expand...
Don't bookies base their favorites on the amount of money placed on an individual?
 
jaggy said:
Don't bookies base their favorites on the amount of money placed on an individual?
Click to expand...

That is part of it, espeicaly once they start bidding. I am thinking more of the starting odds though in those cases I referenced, even the starting odds had Konta for Wimbledon 2016, and in 09 at one of the slams Murray tops. I dont know all the exact elements that go into it. @helterskelter would be a better one to provide all the details.
 
It is hard to keep ahead of the pack in the WTA these days. Players have coaches taking notes all the time, noting what rivals don't do well. You fall a little, everybody is onto you baying like wolves.
 
deacsyoga said:
That is part of it, espeicaly once they start bidding. I am thinking more of the starting odds though in those cases I referenced, even the starting odds had Konta for Wimbledon 2016, and in 09 at one of the slams Murray tops. I dont know all the exact elements that go into it. @helterskelter would be a better one to provide all the details.
Click to expand...

They will definitely adjust the odds if a lot of people start betting on a particular person. But even the starting odds take into account their assessment of the likely market - if they think that a person is likely to receive a lot of bets, they will offer shorter odds on that person than they really think warranted (i.e. imply that their chances are better than the bookmakers really think that they are) in order to try to minimize possible losses. That's why it is always a bad idea to place a bet on a British player with a British bookmaker. The bookmaker will always overestimate the British player's chances, because they think that they don't need to offer attractive odds in order to get pundits to bet on the player: many British people will bet on a Brit because of nationalistic optimism.
 
Mainad said:
That particular hype started because, after losing to Federer in his maiden Slam final at the 2008 USO, he then beat him in their next 2 encounters (in the semis of Madrid and in his debut appearance at the WTF). The British press got over excited and thought that Murray had turned the tables on Fed and would likely beat him at the AO as well hence their dubbing of him as the favourite! Both Federer and Djokovic, the defending champion, had some suitably witty put downs on hand when they got to learn of this.
Click to expand...

And was Rafael Nadal, the clear cut World #1 after 2008 and going into 2009, somehow lost in all of that too, LOL!
 
deacsyoga said:
And was Rafael Nadal, the clear cut World #1 after 2008 and going into 2009, somehow lost in all of that too, LOL!
Click to expand...

I guess he was but he was still thought of mainly as a clay phenomenon at that point (even though he had just won Wimbledon and the Olympics) and Murray had just beaten him on hardcourt at the US Open too. Ironic of course that it would be Nadal who would go on to win the tournament. I think the press were reasonable to cite Murray as ONE of the favourites going into the AO that year, just over the top in proclaiming him THE favourite.
 
I'm wondering if the other players have figured out how to play her. I watched her recent match w/ Strycova. And Strycova returned her groundies with as little pace as possible, aiming for the middle & mid-court (half-way between the service & baseline). So, that gave Konta no angles to play, and dares her to come to the net. Like most of the other non-doubles players, her net game s*cks. Monica did the same.

Don't worry. During Konta's next big match, she'll weasel-out one of her infamous extended medical time-outs at an opportune time, and get back into her groove. No worries there. Bet your life on it.
 
Fabresque said:
What is the British media doing? Any player that comes through and breaks into the top 20 under the age of 25 is instantly a slam winner and future no. 1 in their book. Bottom line, she isn’t that good. All the top 5 women right now are better than her. She isn’t even ****ing British lol.

Just don’t listen to the media, especially not the British media. They tend to get too far ahead of themselves, which also includes “Andy Murray to dominate sport for years, surpass 10 slam mark.”
Click to expand...

Most of our top sportspeople are born overseas, the England Cricket team has been mostly South Africans, Australians, New Zealanders, West Indians, Indians & Pakistanis.
 
George Turner said:
6-1 6-2 to some random with a slice forehand.

Here in Britain the media have been hyping Konta as a future no.1 and Grand Slam Champion. The British media do like to overhype things.

Nevertheless, what's going on with Konta? Has her confidence gone? Can she get it back?
Click to expand...
Ah, random slicer I see!
 
Fabresque said:
What is the British media doing? Any player that comes through and breaks into the top 20 under the age of 25 is instantly a slam winner and future no. 1 in their book. Bottom line, she isn’t that good. All the top 5 women right now are better than her. She isn’t even ****ing British lol.

Just don’t listen to the media, especially not the British media. They tend to get too far ahead of themselves, which also includes “Andy Murray to dominate sport for years, surpass 10 slam mark.”
Click to expand...

When did they say that? Andy has actually done pretty well despite the media hype because he just ignores it and focusses on doing his own thing in his own time and way. He is one of the few top British sportsmen to thrive with or without the press hype!
 
Bobby Jr said:
The first time I heard her talk I thought: she sounds like an Aussie. LMAO at countries who adopt players who spent almost their entire life being developed elsewhere. Greg Rusedski did it - he was already a top player for Canada then suddenly became British when he realised he'd get more support there. Then Cameron Norrie recently, born in South Africa and spent his formative tennis years in NZ suddenly became British when he realised he'd get more funding/support.

Is the UK strategy to fund foreigners to achieve their tennis success? If so, I guess it's sort of working.
Click to expand...

We are a nation of couch potatoes, who don't play much sport due to our leaders selling off school playing fields at an alarming rate, our abysmal weather, & general apathy towards anything other than Soccer-Cricket & Rugby are somewhat popular but unless you go to a posh school your chances of playing those are slim. Same problem with Tennis-it is still something of an elitist sport, most of the Brit players over the years have come from wealthy families who can afford to fund their or their children's dream of being a top player. It doesn't appeal to most kids-especially black ones who have zero role models in British Tennis history & lots of appeal in Soccer where the rewards for making it can be 50k upwards a week, why would they want to struggle trying to make it in a sport where only a small minority of Brits have ever made it to a decent level?
 
Tshooter said:
It’s part of the process.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2016/01/jos-journey/57391/
Click to expand...

1. Give bland interview about how tough your opponent is & how much you love this venue & the fans.
2. Walk on court looking stern.
3. Keep losing your ball toss after your incredibly irritating serving style annoys everybody.
4. Fall over.
5. Start crying.
6. MTO.
7. Return & win.
8. Talk about how tough it was out there, how much the fans support means, how tough your next opponent is.
9. Rinse, repeat.
 
MLRoy said:
I'm wondering if the other players have figured out how to play her. I watched her recent match w/ Strycova. And Strycova returned her groundies with as little pace as possible, aiming for the middle & mid-court (half-way between the service & baseline). So, that gave Konta no angles to play, and dares her to come to the net. Like most of the other non-doubles players, her net game s*cks. Monica did the same.

Don't worry. During Konta's next big match, she'll weasel-out one of her infamous extended medical time-outs at an opportune time, and get back into her groove. No worries there. Bet your life on it.
Click to expand...

Probably a large part of it-Bouchard was the same, there was a spinner in Cricket some years back who burst on the scene & took loads of wickets because nobody knew how to deal with him, then they worked him out & he faded. http://www.espncricinfo.com/srilanka/content/player/268739.html
 
MatsPhilander said:
1. Give bland interview about how tough your opponent is & how much you love this venue & the fans.
2. Walk on court looking stern.
3. Keep losing your ball toss after your incredibly irritating serving style annoys everybody.
4. Fall over.
5. Start crying.
6. MTO.
7. Return & win.
8. Talk about how tough it was out there, how much the fans support means, how tough your next opponent is.
9. Rinse, repeat.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, are there any British sportspeople you actually like? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Aussie Darcy
WTA pro’s, coaches and former players vote on which players have the best elements of singles tennis
Replies
7
Views
990
GOATcheese
G
Cabeza del Demonio
20for20 #7: 2008 3R, Federer vs Tipsarevic
Replies
7
Views
791
Cabeza del Demonio
Cabeza del Demonio
Mainad
Virginia Wade describes the day she won Wimbledon
Replies
1
Views
567
jrepac
J
J
1ga turns 23 today:}
Replies
6
Views
461
Jonesy
J
Rafa4LifeEver
Since 2020, Djokovic has...
2
Replies
65
Views
3K
Rafa4LifeEver
Rafa4LifeEver
Back
Top