What is the main thing that makes a Slam more difficult to win than a Masters 1000?
- Thread starter Standaa
- Start date
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Best of 5. We see the fitness problems and unwillingness to battle the NextGen is characteristic of.
robthai
Hall of Fame
What if they make slams best of 3 just to cater to them. I can see it happening. Its a real possibility unless a next gen makes breakthrough soon at slam level.
That would probably be the worst thing that can happen to tennis, next to Fedr retiring.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
BO5 easily. It's not only about the physical aspect, but the mental part too. Knowing that you have to play your best possibly over 5 sets doesn't help you mentally in executing your strategy because you know how difficult it will be to maintain.
Look at RG. It's one thing to face Nadal in BO3 on clay, but the task becomes increasingly herculean to face him in BO5. It's tiring mentally to be able to outplay Nadal over 5 sets on clay.
Look at RG. It's one thing to face Nadal in BO3 on clay, but the task becomes increasingly herculean to face him in BO5. It's tiring mentally to be able to outplay Nadal over 5 sets on clay.
HetTheGreaterer
Banned
First time you said something upon which I can agree at 100%
HetTheGreaterer
Banned
Only if raingod didn't halt djoker in 2012 and diego in 2018
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Well, to be fair, Djokovic had already got fortunate with the muddy conditions that allowed him to even win 8 games in a row. Nadal was owning him before that.
HetTheGreaterer
Banned
Diegoat~???
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Also got fortunate with the weddy conditions before the rain. After the rain there was sun, and so moonballs from Nadal.
Roddick85
Hall of Fame
I would say BO5 format and the fact that you have to play 7 matches over 2 long weeks instead of 5-6 in 1 week. I can't say I fully agree that fitness has a bigger impact at the slam level vs MS-1000. Playing 5 back to back BO3 matches with no rest in between sounds harder to me than 7 BO5 matches with a day of rest in between. When you have close to 48 hours to recover between matches vs 24 hours or less at the MS-1000 level, I think unfit players will get exposed a lot more in a MS-1000 than at a slam.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
The mental aspect of winning a slam is huge, easily as big as the B05 factor.
Imagine players like Thiem, Anderson, Gasquet or Cilic playing a slam final against Djokovic or Nadal. We'll gift them a 6-4, 6-2, 4-1 lead. I still think all of them would choke away the match and eventually lose.
I am still in shock that Stan managed to hold it together to win his slams, considering the quality of his opponents.
Imagine players like Thiem, Anderson, Gasquet or Cilic playing a slam final against Djokovic or Nadal. We'll gift them a 6-4, 6-2, 4-1 lead. I still think all of them would choke away the match and eventually lose.
I am still in shock that Stan managed to hold it together to win his slams, considering the quality of his opponents.
abmk
Bionic Poster
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
The slams more often than not separates the men from the boys, the pretenders from the contenders.
But lets be honest here, the big four have made everything hard for other players to win, they have made the entire tour their personal playground.
But lets be honest here, the big four have made everything hard for other players to win, they have made the entire tour their personal playground.
Djokovicfan
Professional
Theyll never go to 3. It would be a different sport. 5 sets makes tennis legitamately an endurance sport.
If you have a problem with that then just beat your opponent in straight sets.
5 sets rewards the most natural tennis player. 3 sets would reward the best player less often than 5 sets.
Watch strokes of genius and tell me that match would be as good if it was best of 3.
It wouldnt.
HetTheGreaterer
Banned
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll