Today's tennis is just sickening....

Some nice backhands and volleys she played with that 400gm racquet.

Grown men now complain if the racquet weights more than 315gm.
In fairness, that's because of the technique employed in tennis today. Swings are much faster and sometimes longer, so the weight of the racquet does become a factor.
 

LDVTennis

Professional
I've actually been up close to a bunch of WTA players including Petra, and they are way leaner and fitter than TV distorts, and I'd conservatively say 90% of you would love to have a wife or Girlfriend HALF as fit as them!
So have I...

Yeah, it's all TV. In person, Petra has the face of Gisele Bundchen and the body of Steffi Graf.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
EVERYTHING is worse today. Microwaves make the food taste worse than ovens. MP3s sound worse than CDs. Cars have little feel. Movies are crap. You can't sleep on today's mattresses. Fallon is worse than Leno. Texting is a poor substitute for hearing someone's voice..you get the idea.
Truth.
Would you please comment on popular music?
Fashion?
Cotton vs polyester?
How about the build quality of middle class houses?
The flavor and nutrients in vegetables and fruit?
Steel framed bikes vs carbon fiber?
Rising estrogen levels in drinking water and diminishing testosterone levels?
Water from a glass versus water out of plastic?
 
At least Petra attacks somewhat and takes advantage of that left handed slider on the grass. Bouchard is just a Babolat baseline ball basher.
What does the brand of racquet have to do with this?
The other companies sell a ton of pure drive or apd knockoffs (juice, 500, tflash 300, extreme, steam, instinct).

Babolat, like the other companies all make frames that are used for things other than baseline bashing. Your view is probably broader that this, but that post makes is seem rather limited.
 
Last edited:
?..
Grown men now complain if the racquet weights more than 315gm.
Okay, who are these "men"? These little nancyboys need to go to break point's summer camp for a couple of sessions.

Here is a week for the middle schoolers:
Wood racquet tennis, steel bikes, handwriting a thank you note, actually placing a phone call, cutting and preparing a complete meal on an open flame, getting a blister that will turn into a callus, sleeping in a tent outdoors, occasionally skipping a meal, drinking water without ice, graphite racquet tennis over 330g, under 98 heads, leather grips, no polyester in the racquet on on your back, walking uphill, riding a bike uphill without shifting into the granny chain ring, asking a girl out while making eye contact, not shaving one's chest or trimming one's eyebrows, going someplace without asking what everyone else will be wearing, serving and volleying a few times per set, maybe even just serving and approaching, chip and charging once or twice, hitting a drop-volley, playing catch with a baseball and no glove, going a day with a cut and no band-aid...basically just getting the basic man card back up in here.

Optional: catching, gutting and grilling a fish. Eating the whole fish, not just the filet.

Not optional: Playing a match while learning to construct points with a wooden frame.
 
Last edited:
Kvitova is a talented shotmaker. It's too bad she had to face the overhyped scrub in the final. The real final was R3 vs Venus
+1

That was a great match up.

I don't have a problem with the way our new champ played today. She played big time tennis. I find it a tad unfair for the OP to insinuate that it's somehow easy to consistently hit winners like that all match long. It simply isn't. I preferred watching her match with big time shot making that a mens match with 50+ aces.

KL
 

Graf=GOAT

Professional
At least Petra attacks somewhat and takes advantage of that left handed slider on the grass. Bouchard is just a Babolat baseline ball basher.
It's not the racket brand. Kvitova has a great serve technique. She's probably top female server after S.Williams at the moment, especially on grass.
 
I am all for market driven success, but on the pro level, I blame the tennis establishment for not getting its act together, letting the almighty dollar rule, and not having some restrictions on equipment.

Golf and baseball held the line well.
Probably too late. But going back, i see wisdom in:

1) max 98 head and a 22 mm beam, 27 inch length. Too tough to regulate strings, but no poly would be nice.
2) wood, 75 head, open throat is fine, no poly.
 

HRB

Hall of Fame
+1

That was a great match up.

I don't have a problem with the way our new champ played today. She played big time tennis. I find it a tad unfair for the OP to insinuate that it's somehow easy to consistently hit winners like that all match long. It simply isn't. I preferred watching her match with big time shot making that a mens match with 50+ aces.

KL
Yeah, I mean clearly 28 winners to 12 UE's was just by swinging aimlessly with no plans. IDIOTS!
 
From 'Chris' with "love" (2x)

LOL. Their second serves are slower than mine.

BTW, why was Evert
allowed to wear a shirt that is almost half not white?
Chicolinni my love, you wouldn't get a game off Evert, esp. in her prime ….. (obviously 'tennis skills' don't register with you, i.e. depth, precision-placement of strokes, focus under pressure, etc).

Next time please re-think your *insightful* contentions least you come across as yet another 3.0 (at best) fanboy whose cluelessness sits right up there on the wall alongside the posters of their (undoubtebly shirtless) "favorite fanboy player" :)

She'd dust you Chico, 6-oh; 6-oh………..oh!..oh!…oh!….Chico!……candy!! :)



Oh…Oh…Oh…Bonomo… Turkish Taffy…
 
Last edited:

cknobman

Legend
Dumb thread.

Sorry BP but you are sounding like some of the bumhurt fans of a particular spanish player (as well as the player and his coach).

"They dont play the way I want so I will criticize and belittle what they are doing"

Everything these players are doing takes an immense amount of skill. It may be a slightly different set of skills than what you prefer to see but they are skills none the less.

Its all relative. As the game changes so does the skill set needed to play it. The skills players had of past would not be adequate to play in todays game so if those players existed today they would develop a different set of skills.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Lol at Tracy Austin's Shirley Temple dress (with the big blue bow at the back) and her pigtails and braces! :)

It's just tennis from a completely different era. No power serving, slow, methodical groundstokes, long baseline rallies (didn't see much S & V in either match). Quaint and interesting to watch but not in any way 'superior' to what is played today IMO!

The game evolves and moves on. Players evolve and move on. Different styles for different eras. Each good and appropriate for their own particular time-frame.

So stop wallowing in the past!. As some wag once pointed out (I forget who):

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be!"
Sometimes I wish you would stop being so diplomatic and PC about everything.
 

bertrevert

Hall of Fame
Evolution - and it's not done yet.

Reckon we'll see sound effects, player-cam, 3D CGI replays...

Love the power and feel of the modern game - addictive.

Can only just remember playing with wood and aluminium frames and my recall is that they were just not as enjoyable...
 
So I just watched the Wimbledon women's final and it was just ridiculous! Just two players blasting the ball at each other. These modern racquets have destroyed the beautiful sport of tennis. Gone are the strategy, point construction, finesse, touch, guile, etc. Now the entire strategy is just to hit the ball as hard as you can on every shot. Kvitova hit some shots that she had no business hitting. Give her a wood racquet and no way does she come close at hitting those kind of shots.

Tennis is supposed to like chess on a big board. A cerebral game. Now it's like nothing but a shoot 'em up video game. It's disgusting! If you want to play a video game, get yourself an Xbox. Tennis is supposed to be mano-a-mano using only your natural abilities with nothing to aid you. Today's tennis is like allowing boxers to bring weapons into the ring. Wouldn't that also ruin the sport of boxing?

This has gone way too far for too long. It's like allowing the players to bring AK-47's onto the court to blast each other away. Wood racquets were the closest thing to having no weapons at all. Tennis should be all you and you being the only only weapon. Tennis was never invented to be played the way it is today. Or else they would have made the court smaller and the net higher.

This is the way tennis was meant to be played: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0uoVeHmsIw

End of rant.
Other than the fact you shouldn't give a toss about WTA, I feel you aren't being realistic enough.

Serena Williams when asked whether she would play Andy Murray laughed and replied; 'the women's game is JUST another entirely, completely different sport'

...and I think here in-lies the problem. WTA is and always has been about exposing the weak serve of your opponent. So if you have a big serve and can get good from practise at bashing returns, you're essentially with the potential to be a top, top player.

Kvitova obviously showed a little more than that today, so props, but generally that is how it goes.

They're a bunch of Barthel's, Hampton's, Cirstea's. Wreckless, aimless ball-bashers . There are odd suprises like Justine Henin and company but it's rare.

A lot of the coaches for WTA are churning out these players that;s entire game is to bash on the front-foot. The WTA second serve is a joke. Even Bocuhard who's a ridiculous talent, lacks a slice serve for grass. Who else? Kerber. lol Then there's Jovanvoski's weak second serve ... Azarenka's ... Makarova's ... that's why I say most of the WTA contests hinge on how well they return the second serve and how much they can capitalise on it. There's very few baseline exchanges at these premier events.... slams is different, coz we see the best of the best in the latter stages.

However at mid-ranked level we do see more point construction - Though I personally don't find toddler, moonballing, ball-absorbing tennis between the likes of Errani, Vinci, Radwanska and say Wozniacki much fun to watch either.

Just cancel the WTA tour out from your mind man and quit being so 'elitist' with your idea of what is 'good' tennis. Unless you wanna diss Raonic the serving robotic dullard.

Side-note: Caroline Garcia, Bouchard, Halep and co are a breathe of fresh air for that tour which has been dead for many years since Henin's retirement.
 
Last edited:

Chopin

Hall of Fame
This thread is disrespectful to the game, to the incredible display Kvitova put on today, and to the up and coming talent that is Bouchard. The thread comes off as bashing these players who are maximizing their potential in tennis. It's a little like those criticize Magnus Carlsen because they don't like the fact that computers have changed the way that humans play chess. The thread is also ironic as it directs us to a video of Evert when Evert herself has been so supportive of Bouchard and the next generation of players.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
Are you for real...that is the most god awful UN-exciting Krap I've ever watched...it's like watching the middle aged chicks at the local park. Thanks god the powers that be are not old fashioned Luddites like you or I'd hate tennis.

Here's a clue..Martina rocked out because she was an ATHLETE in an era where they were RARE...now all the girls are ATHLETES...so you can't get away with the slow paced rinky dink patty cake krap you crave...you'll be crushed...ask AGA!

Why are you so bitter about the modern fast paced hard hitting game...ahhh...do the college kids down at the park blow you off the court?
Spoken like a true aficionado of the game. :roll:
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
She does own indoor tourneys....yes, she never see's a reason to not wack at a winner..win or lose..love it!
Yes, it takes so much brains to try and whack a winner on every ball. I'd bet she has an IQ that surpasses even Einstein. :oops:

Tennis is supposed to be like chess, not Call of Duty. :???:
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Other than the fact you shouldn't give a toss about WTA, I feel you aren't being realistic enough.

Serena Williams when asked whether she would play Andy Murray laughed and replied; 'the women's game is JUST another entirely, completely different sport'

...and I think here in-lies the problem. WTA is and always has been about exposing the weak serve of your opponent. So if you have a big serve and can get good from practise at bashing returns, you're essentially with the potential to be a top, top player.

Kvitova obviously showed a little more than that today, so props, but generally that is how it goes.

They're a bunch of Barthel's, Hampton's, Cirstea's. Wreckless, aimless ball-bashers . There are odd suprises like Justine Henin and company but it's rare.

A lot of the coaches for WTA are churning out these players that;s entire game is to bash on the front-foot. The WTA second serve is a joke. Even Bocuhard who's a ridiculous talent, lacks a slice serve for grass. Who else? Kerber. lol Then there's Jovanvoski's weak second serve ... Azarenka's ... Makarova's ... that's why I say most of the WTA contests hinge on how well they return the second serve and how much they can capitalise on it. There's very few baseline exchanges at these premier events.... slams is different, coz we see the best of the best in the latter stages.

However at mid-ranked level we do see more point construction - Though I personally don't find toddler, moonballing, ball-absorbing tennis between the likes of Errani, Vinci, Radwanska and say Wozniacki much fun to watch either.

Just cancel the WTA tour out from your mind man and quit being so 'elitist' with your idea of what is 'good' tennis. Unless you wanna diss Raonic the serving robotic dullard.

Side-note: Caroline Garcia, Bouchard, Halep and co are a breathe of fresh air for that tour which has been dead for many years since Henin's retirement.
you must be confused :confused:

its obvious some on this forum are obsessed with ballerina aesthetics and therefore love players like Henin and Federer; but how does Bouchard or Garcia replicate such :confused:

perhaps Halep, but Bouchard's game is not 'pretty' at all. it can be effective, although it certainly wasn't today...
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
Some nice backhands and volleys she played with that 400gm racquet.

Grown men now complain if the racquet weights more than 315gm.
Ha ha ha Exactly!

It'd be funny as heck to take away today's grown men's APD and put a wood racquet in their hands and watch them cry. What? You actually need skill and strength to play tennis? :lol: LOL
 

President

Legend
Ha ha ha Exactly!

It'd be funny as heck to take away today's grown men's APD and put a wood racquet in their hands and watch them cry. What? You actually need skill and strength to play tennis? :lol: LOL
So you think Evert is stronger and has more advanced technique than Nadal and Djokovic? The racquet technology has made the use of BETTER (more sophisticated) technique possible, as well as unlocked the ability to actually use your full strength when playing tennis. There is a reason all players spend far more time in the gym these days than they did in the 70's.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
So you think Evert is stronger and has more advanced technique than Nadal and Djokovic? The racquet technology has made the use of BETTER (more sophisticated) technique possible, as well as unlocked the ability to actually use your full strength when playing tennis. There is a reason all players spend far more time in the gym these days than they did in the 70's.
No need with this guy. Use your time doing something more constructive.
 
you must be confused :confused:

its obvious some on this forum are obsessed with ballerina aesthetics and therefore love players like Henin and Federer; but how does Bouchard or Garcia replicate such :confused:

perhaps Halep, but Bouchard's game is not 'pretty' at all. it can be effective, although it certainly wasn't today...
Garcia definitely has that air of 'magnifeeeeeeek' touch and creative class every french player has.

Bouchard is exciting, she takes the ball early on the front-foot and clocks off winners. How can you not enjoy winners being struck deliciously? She has sexay passing shots up-the-line too.

I honestly don't get the distaste for Bouchard. Is it because she's well-spoken and from an upper middle-class family background or what? I don't find her game generic, her techniques generic? If anything Djokovic's techniques are generic, but to a high level, just like Bouchard. So why are people reveling in her loss.

It's not as if she's playing the errani / nadal style 5 meter badminton net-clearance with heavy topspin game?

Very confused.
 

fuzz nation

G.O.A.T.
Not exactly interested in resurrecting the pure serve and volley game that the pros were using when I was a kid, but its absence is part of the problem with the WTA. The final today was a bit of a dud because this rising star from Montreal played a one-dimensional game and nothing else.

Genie tried to outslug Petra from the baseline and she lost the first set. What did she do? More of the same... no sign of anything close to a "Plan B". We've been watching the same procession of WTA underlings marching straight into the loss column against Maria, Serena, etc. for YEARS! At least for me, the definition of insanity has taken up residence in the WTA.

Andy Roddick won the US Open early on, but then got passed up by a generation of all-courters. Only later in his career when Larry Stefanki squared him away (in terms of his all-court skills) was he capable of that instant classic of a final at Wimbledon in '09 against Federer. Nadal began winning away from the red clay as he developed more dimension in his game. Some years back, Djokovic hired doubles great Mark Woodford (sp?) for a stretch and has Becker coaching him now... probably not for helping with his baseline game. Fed only has perhaps the greatest serve and volleyer of all time as his current coach. No mystery here.

Aggie Radwanska is currently the number four player in the world, but she does everything other than baseline crushing. Case closed. The men's game went through its phase of predominate power baselining years ago and has evolved beyond that. What's been nauseating for me (and maybe for BP, too) has been the wait for a long overdue generation of ladies with more complete skill sets to take over. Today's final offered no signs of that wait coming to an end.
 

Chopin

Hall of Fame
Garcia definitely has that air of 'magnifeeeeeeek' touch and creative class every french player has.

Bouchard is exciting, she takes the ball early on the front-foot and clocks off winners. How can you not enjoy winners being struck deliciously? She has sexay passing shots up-the-line too.

I honestly don't get the distaste for Bouchard. Is it because she's well-spoken and from an upper middle-class family background or what? I don't find her game generic, her techniques generic? If anything Djokovic's techniques are generic, but to a high level, just like Bouchard. So why are people reveling in her loss.

It's not as if she's playing the errani / nadal style 5 meter badminton net-clearance with heavy topspin game?

Very confused.
Bouchard has done nothing objectionable in my opinion. She seems like a future champion. I think some of the pushback against her on these boards is due to sexism and the fact that she's attractive. Guys here get bent out of shape because she's confident, playing professional tennis and they would have zero chance with her even if she wasn't famous ha! Just my "two cents." These boards are the pits these days.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Garcia definitely has that air of 'magnifeeeeeeek' touch and creative class every french player has.

Bouchard is exciting, she takes the ball early on the front-foot and clocks off winners. How can you not enjoy winners being struck deliciously? She has sexay passing shots up-the-line too.

I honestly don't get the distaste for Bouchard. Is it because she's well-spoken and from an upper middle-class family background or what? I don't find her game generic, her techniques generic? If anything Djokovic's techniques are generic, but to a high level, just like Bouchard. So why are people reveling in her loss.

It's not as if she's playing the errani / nadal style 5 meter badminton net-clearance with heavy topspin game?

Very confused.
i actually picked Bouchard to win in 3, although i said that if Kivitova were to play her best she would win easily.

i don't have distaste for Bouchard, i just don't think her game is pretty at all (like a female Courier), which i thought you were alluding to with your Henin reference.

Bouchard does take the ball very early (even earlier than Azeranka) and can dictate especially off the BH. but when faced with so much power like she was today she did not hit the ball cleanly at all. she also does not have any plan B yet, such as changing the pace, using slice, etc. plus her serve needs work. but, i think she will win a slam one day...
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
So you think Evert is stronger and has more advanced technique than Nadal and Djokovic? The racquet technology has made the use of BETTER (more sophisticated) technique possible, as well as unlocked the ability to actually use your full strength when playing tennis. There is a reason all players spend far more time in the gym these days than they did in the 70's.
Then how come so many pros today can't even handle 13 oz. racquets, let alone the 14 oz and 15 oz wood racquets that the pros used to use. Don Budge used a 16 oz. wood racquet. If you want to see a grown man cry, take away his 11 oz. APD and give him a 16 oz. wood racquet. LOL :)
 

Blocker

Professional
This nostalgia thing never ends. In 30 years time when players are playing with racquets which have sensors built into the strings to read the sensors built into the ball so they can self-adjust their tension in accordance with how the ball is spinning and its trajectory, all the turds who today argue that today's is the best way will be calling for an end to technology and that it should get back to the way things were in the 2010s.

Most of you idiots have totally missed the OPs point. His point is that technology has made the players of today better than they really are. In the end it all evens out because every player has access to the same technology. But the person who loses is the spectator. The spectator is now subjected to one style of game, watching good players appear like great players and, as the OP said, robbed the game of its tactical component.

I'm not suggesting a throwback to the Evert Austin days, but a balance between what it once was and what it is now needs to be struck. Aside from the spectator, the biggest loser in the sport is the sport itself. It was once considered a multidimensional game with contrasting styles. Now it's become table tennis, just repetitive and one dimensional.

The OP used the wrong analogy to convey his point, but I get his point. The analogy I would use is an average singer who sings into a microphone which has the technology to make the output, ie what the audience hears, seem like an opera concert, technology that opera singers in bygone eras didn't have.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
Not exactly interested in resurrecting the pure serve and volley game that the pros were using when I was a kid, but its absence is part of the problem with the WTA. The final today was a bit of a dud because this rising star from Montreal played a one-dimensional game and nothing else.

Genie tried to outslug Petra from the baseline and she lost the first set. What did she do? More of the same... no sign of anything close to a "Plan B". We've been watching the same procession of WTA underlings marching straight into the loss column against Maria, Serena, etc. for YEARS! At least for me, the definition of insanity has taken up residence in the WTA.

Andy Roddick won the US Open early on, but then got passed up by a generation of all-courters. Only later in his career when Larry Stefanki squared him away (in terms of his all-court skills) was he capable of that instant classic of a final at Wimbledon in '09 against Federer. Nadal began winning away from the red clay as he developed more dimension in his game. Some years back, Djokovic hired doubles great Mark Woodford (sp?) for a stretch and has Becker coaching him now... probably not for helping with his baseline game. Fed only has perhaps the greatest serve and volleyer of all time as his current coach. No mystery here.

Aggie Radwanska is currently the number four player in the world, but she does everything other than baseline crushing. Case closed. The men's game went through its phase of predominate power baselining years ago and has evolved beyond that. What's been nauseating for me (and maybe for BP, too) has been the wait for a long overdue generation of ladies with more complete skill sets to take over. Today's final offered no signs of that wait coming to an end.
Great post! I agree. :)
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
This nostalgia thing never ends. In 30 years time when players are playing with racquets which have sensors built into the strings to read the sensors built into the ball so they can self-adjust their tension in accordance with how the ball is spinning and its trajectory, all the turds who today argue that today's is the best way will be calling for an end to technology and that it should get back to the way things were in the 2010s.

Most of you idiots have totally missed the OPs point. His point is that technology has made the players of today better than they really are. In the end it all evens out because every player has access to the same technology. But the person who loses is the spectator. The spectator is now subjected to one style of game, watching good players appear like great players and, as the OP said, robbed the game of its tactical component.

I'm not suggesting a throwback to the Evert Austin days, but a balance between what it once was and what it is now needs to be struck. Aside from the spectator, the biggest loser in the sport is the sport itself. It was once considered a multidimensional game with contrasting styles. Now it's become table tennis, just repetitive and one dimensional.

The OP used the wrong analogy to convey his point, but I get his point. The analogy I would use is an average singer who sings into a microphone which has the technology to make the output, ie what the audience hears, seem like an opera concert, technology that opera singers in bygone eras didn't have.
Yup, excellent post.

You get it!

:)
 
lol Breakpoint is a joker.

Anyone that agrees with his ranting and acknowledges they as having listened to it, gets a thumbs up and an 'excellent post mate, you get it'.

You just wanted to have some people to moan to and those to say, we acknowledge what you say and you're right. Everybody needs a moan at someone about something they feel aggrieved about. You are just the same. Needing someone to listen to it. lol

Well I listened breakpoint and I disagreed. So shove that in your pipe and then snort it.
 
Bouchard has done nothing objectionable in my opinion. She seems like a future champion. I think some of the pushback against her on these boards is due to sexism and the fact that she's attractive. Guys here get bent out of shape because she's confident, playing professional tennis and they would have zero chance with her even if she wasn't famous ha! Just my "two cents." These boards are the pits these days.
I don't get it. If there's sexism? They shouldn't be watching the WTA at all, period?


Ohhhhh ... I;m with you now, from the bolded part. lol That is quite the petty, pathetic juvenile nonsense right there. LOL!

Basically - 'We hate you because you look like the girl we got rejected by in school - As nerds we UNITE'

LOL! Sad, pathetic, silly and immature.
 
i actually picked Bouchard to win in 3, although i said that if Kivitova were to play her best she would win easily.

i don't have distaste for Bouchard, i just don't think her game is pretty at all (like a female Courier), which i thought you were alluding to with your Henin reference.

Bouchard does take the ball very early (even earlier than Azeranka) and can dictate especially off the BH. but when faced with so much power like she was today she did not hit the ball cleanly at all. she also does not have any plan B yet, such as changing the pace, using slice, etc. plus her serve needs work. but, i think she will win a slam one day...
Can't see why for the life of you, you picked her to win in 3, or eve get a set off her honestly. I had good money on Petra.

Grass is all about the serve and return of serve. I agree with becoming more a complete player, some players don't need to become complete players, like Kvitova. However when you're an attacking player and your weight of shot isn't amazing like Serena, Kvitova's and Sharapvoa's then you really do need to build other assets and faculties to your arsenal.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
I don't get it. If there's sexism? They shouldn't be watching the WTA at all, period?


Ohhhhh ... I;m with you now, from the bolded part. lol That is quite the petty, pathetic juvenile nonsense right there. LOL!

Basically - 'We hate you because you look like the girl we got rejected by in school - As nerds we UNITE'

LOL! Sad, pathetic, silly and immature.
Interesting how you replied to that post. It's okay, mate. School is in the past......and the bolded part has much lulz to it :lol:
 

Chopin

Hall of Fame
I don't get it. If there's sexism? They shouldn't be watching the WTA at all, period?


Ohhhhh ... I;m with you now, from the bolded part. lol That is quite the petty, pathetic juvenile nonsense right there. LOL!

Basically - 'We hate you because you look like the girl we got rejected by in school - As nerds we UNITE'

LOL! Sad, pathetic, silly and immature.
Well, I was kidding, but there may be some truth in what I wrote. Anyways, I wish people would just enjoy tennis. If someone has a problem with tennis today, s/he should discuss such problems and solutions in a calm, thoughtful way. Write to the governing bodies, create petitions, but don't try to bring everyone else down. I love tennis in its current form, even if I believe some changes should be made.
 
Last edited:

pjonesy

Professional
So you think Evert is stronger and has more advanced technique than Nadal and Djokovic? The racquet technology has made the use of BETTER (more sophisticated) technique possible, as well as unlocked the ability to actually use your full strength when playing tennis. There is a reason all players spend far more time in the gym these days than they did in the 70's.
Sure the game has evolved. Modern players certainly hit harder, have superior technique, defend the court better and are more accurate with their shots.

However, I prefer to look at it differently. 2 things stand out, when looking at Evert's accomplishments and her style of play. 1)Her 90plus% winning percentage (along with her success on clay). 2)Evert is absolutely the most influential player of the open era. 95% of the current players on the WTA tour, play an updated variation of Evert's 2hbh baseline game. Evert was the prototype for what we have now, for both the men's and women's tours. Sorry to burst your bubble, but Evert is still the queen. I have absolutely no doubt that if Evert was born in the early 80s, she would be in every match on the current tour. If Henin and Hingis could win majors in the recent past, I say that Evert would flourish. She is simply a notch above those 2. But even if it was determined that Evert wasn't a superior player by modern standards, she would still be the most influential player. IMO
 
Interesting how you replied to that post. It's okay, mate. School is in the past......and the bolded part has much lulz to it :lol:
What? lol I replied to everybody's post that was aimed at me. lol

Read through the responses. Did I skip someone, you?

I didn't focus on that post more than others? lol You joker.

I certainly wasn't the nerd with the tough time out there lol but it royally ****es me off if that is the reason she gets this hatred.
 
Well, I was kidding, but there may be some truth in what I wrote. Anyways, I wish people would just enjoy tennis. If someone has a problem with tennis today, s/he discuss such problems and solutions in a calm, thoughtful way. Write to the governing bodies, create petitions, but don't try to bring everyone else down. I love tennis in its current form, even if I believe some changes should be made.
I agree mate.

As for break-point; he strikes me as an idealist, that needs to let go of the 90s and move on.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
What? lol I replied to everybody's post that was aimed at me. lol

Read through the responses. Did I skip someone, you?

I didn't focus on that post more than others? lol You joker.

I certainly wasn't the nerd with the tough time out there lol but it royally ****es me off if that is the reason she gets this hatred.
I didn't mean the post in general. I meant how you typed out your post. J/K anyways... everything ****es you off, so there is no surprise there! :grin:

He was joking anyways.....
 

pjonesy

Professional
While I do agree that the women's game has become tedious and boring to watch, I find it ironic that Kvitova is being singled out as being part of the problem.

First of all, the goal is to WIN!! There are no rules that dictate that you have to compete in a certain way or play an approved game style, in order to participate on the WTA tour.

Kvitova does play a power baseline game, but it's not the same as every other player on tour. You can see some old school characteristics in her game. She has a great slice backhand and realizes the power of hitting a flat ball on grass. If her game continues to improve, I think we will see her using her weapons, but also develop into a more skillful player with variety in her game.
 
I didn't mean the post in general. I meant how you typed out your post. J/K anyways... everything ****es you off, so there is no surprise there! :grin:

He was joking anyways.....
lol

Well, in my time here I've experienced some muppets, so I was prepared for believing something like that my wigga! :)
 
Top