Sometimes , I really wonder

#51
If Kevin Anderson can lead peak Djokovic 2-0, I'm sure the greats of bygone times would manage to adjust and compete well, to say the least.
Kevin Anderson served from a tree top that day in one of the best serving performances of his career and held his own in baseline rallies. Even then he still barely won those sets. Becker and Mac did not win their titles from the back court.
 
#56
Match is on my channel ;)

JJ was serving and hitting big but Arod definitely shouldn't have lost imo. Agreed about Gilbert, all his best wins after 2004 had him hitting the big but it was rare for him to go for that play against Federer...
I will have to check it out. Gilbert is very underrated as a coach in my opinion. He got the best out of Agassi and Roddick.
 
#59
I have been saying that during Roland Garros already. Though he should try to improve the return compared to last year. There were moments during the previous Wimbledon when it was frustrating, although at that time he was only starting to come back from his two year slump...
Only way I see Djoker losing Wimbledon is if he beats himself mentally. I think being down by 3 slams to rafa now that he will be motivated like crazy.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
#60
He’s always been very candid in his interviews and pretty much says it as it is.

Anyway you are working from the faulty premise that their is an ‘admission’ when both him and myself don’t see one.
And Roddick says there's a great generation of young American players. I mean why would he speak the truth?
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
#62
tennis really is, despite being a global sport, a niche sport in some ways because only would tennis fans care so much whether a fan plays tennis or not when being a fan and commenting on the sport. i have friends who are sports fans and i dont recall anyone ever asking oh well do you play basketball or football when talking about those respective sports but apparently with tennis, its such a weird thing. i truly dont get it but then this is a sport that craps itself when fans actually behave like sports fans and pretend that they are above in anyway despite the regular controversies.
It's only a couple of weekend warriors here that think that only by playing tennis are you permitted to comment on it. Today when most people think of tennis players they think of country clubs and blue-haired ladies. The Beta males are just desperately clinging to their last ounce of machismo by declaring they and only they have a voice that matters.

I put them on ignore.
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
#63
He’s always been very candid in his interviews and pretty much says it as it is.

Anyway you are working from the faulty premise that their is an ‘admission’ when both him and myself don’t see one.
To assume Fred believes that he's better now and it wasn't marketing is the most gullible thing I've ever heard. To actually believe Fred Is better now than he used to be leads me to wonder 2 things 1). Did you start watching tennis before 2012? 2). Do you watch tennis with your eyes open?
 
#64
I have been saying that during Roland Garros already. Though he should try to improve the return compared to last year. There were moments during the previous Wimbledon when it was frustrating, although at that time he was only starting to come back from his two year slump...

Yep. His return and DTL from both wings.In the WB SF He pinned Nadal a million times in one corner but rather going Down the line to finish it all , he allowed the rally to be reset. On return he netted way too many regular ones even at important points.

If both of those things were working, we won't be hearing about any roof conspiracy. Because the match itself wouldn't have gone further than 4th.
 
#65
To assume Fred believes that he's better now and it wasn't marketing is the most gullible thing I've ever heard. To actually believe Fred Is better now than he used to be leads me to wonder 2 things 1). Did you start watching tennis before 2012? 2). Do you watch tennis with your eyes open?
The racket change is so fundamental. I’m surprised someone who watches the game as closely as you can’t see the difference.

Or, to sink to your level, do you not watch tennis but just regurgitate the myths that pass for facts on TTW?
 
#66
The racket change is so fundamental. I’m surprised someone who watches the game as closely as you can’t see the difference.

Or, to sink to your level, do you not watch tennis but just regurgitate the myths that pass for facts on TTW?
The racket has definitely helped Fed do things he couldn't when he was younger. Or better yet, helped him do things he can't anymore due to age.

However, Fed's movement, mental lapses, and forehand have dropped significantly. He now has to play a more aggressive "red line" game, and when it works it looks aesthetically much better than early 00's at times. But for me, I still say a 2006 Fed beats a 2017 Fed.
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
#67
The racket change is so fundamental. I’m surprised someone who watches the game as closely as you can’t see the difference.

Or, to sink to your level, do you not watch tennis but just regurgitate the myths that pass for facts on TTW?
Actually last night I re-watched the 2005 USOpen final between Federer and Agassi. Watch that and then you'll delete every post you've made in this thread. Be honest you NEVER watched a tennis match before 2012. It's obvious.
 
#71
Actually last night I re-watched the 2005 USOpen final between Federer and Agassi. Watch that and then you'll delete every post you've made in this thread. Be honest you NEVER watched a tennis match before 2012. It's obvious.

Honestly what I find bizarre in these interactions is that people feel so uncomfortable with opinions that don’t match their own, that they resort to fantasising about when the person they are arguing with started watching tennis.

Federer himself says it and rather than applying the Law of Parsimony to his comments people embark on creating yet more fantasies to explain why he said such and such.

It’s really not as black and white as you like to pretend it is.
 
Top