would you rather watch ATP or WTA?

[Rabbit]

Can't argue with this. But I think she's exceptional on the WTA in this regard, whereas I see more overall tactical employment and variety of shot on the ATP (Nalbandian, Federer, Murray, Henman, Gasquet, Hewitt, just to name a few). I don't get the feeling most of the WTA players today think much beyond the shot they are hitting. Lots of seemingly mindless bashing. (I will acknowledge JHH and Mauresmo do think about half the time.)

You know what though? I mean it's hard to disagree. However, I saw Nalbandian play Ferrero at the Masters in Houston a few years ago. Dude, and I'm being serious, it was as if the two of them were practicing cross court drills. It was, without a doubt, the most boring match I've ever seen. The strategy was percentage tennis, I understand that. But neither approached the net. Neither tried to win the point outright at any point in the match. It was simply a contest of who missed first. It was B*O*R*I*N*G.

Between the two of them and Martina Hingis, I'd watch Hingis every time. Add to that list Clijsters, Henin (even though she's a greaseball who looks like Harry Potter in drag), Mauresmo, Jakovic and maybe Dechy. Those girls know how to use the whole court and construct points every bit as much as the guys you listed.

And, truthfully, Nalbandian, Murray, and Hewitt are pretty much a bore to watch if they're playing each other or someone like them. You have to have either some personality (Coria vs Hewitt) or a different style which is getting harder and harder to find these days.

Really, in my view, the girls have more variety because they have to.

 

[alienhamster]

You know what though? I mean it's hard to disagree. However, I saw Nalbandian play Ferrero at the Masters in Houston a few years ago. Dude, and I'm being serious, it was as if the two of them were practicing cross court drills. It was, without a doubt, the most boring match I've ever seen. The strategy was percentage tennis, I understand that. But neither approached the net. Neither tried to win the point outright at any point in the match. It was simply a contest of who missed first. It was B*O*R*I*N*G.

Between the two of them and Martina Hingis, I'd watch Hingis every time. Add to that list Clijsters, Henin (even though she's a greaseball who looks like Harry Potter in drag), Mauresmo, Jakovic and maybe Dechy. Those girls know how to use the whole court and construct points every bit as much as the guys you listed.

And, truthfully, Nalbandian, Murray, and Hewitt are pretty much a bore to watch if they're playing each other or someone like them. You have to have either some personality (Coria vs Hewitt) or a different style which is getting harder and harder to find these days.

Really, in my view, the girls have more variety because they have to.

Good point about match-ups. I've definitely seen the cross-court snoozefests you describe, esp. when 2 grinders play each other.

I'll try to give the gals another shot this coming US Open, but I've been so incredibly bored by the youngsters coming up on tour (whereas Murray, Gasquet, and Nadal all seem to offer really nice variety and/or intensity). I'd like to give Hingis like a magic power-up forehand shot just so she could go deeper at these tournaments. It's great to watch her, but it's painful to see her get blown off the court by relentless, brainless power.

Rabbit, do you like Kuznetsova, Sharapova, and those types of power players? (Maybe add in the Williams sisters.) I actually like Petrova (when she's confident) and Dementieva.

 

[Rabbit]

Good point about match-ups. I've definitely seen the cross-court snoozefests you describe, esp. when 2 grinders play each other.

Thanks and right back at ya!

I'll try to give the gals another shot this coming US Open, but I've been so incredibly bored by the youngsters coming up on tour (whereas Murray, Gasquet, and Nadal all seem to offer really nice variety and/or intensity).

You know, with Gasquet, I'll agree. He seems to have that something special as far as court sense goes. He's been very impressive. Once he gets his head on straight (if ever) he'll be a contender in anything he enters. Nads has been steadily improving his all court game to the point that he may come off the baseline more and more. If he does, he'll be very hard to deal with. Murray though just hasn't shown me anything different than the other 99/100 pros. I just don't see it in him.

I'd like to give Hingis like a magic power-up forehand shot just so she could go deeper at these tournaments. It's great to watch her, but it's painful to see her get blown off the court by relentless, brainless power.

She's blunting more and more of it with her spectacular use of court. She beat Kuznetsova just the other night in a great display of ability. I agree about the relentless power, but don't you think it's more in evidence on the ATP?

Rabbit, do you like Kuznetsova, Sharapova, and those types of power players? (Maybe add in the Williams sisters.) I actually like Petrova (when she's confident) and Dementieva.

Kuznetsova is really something different in my book. She's built like a linebacker and plays the whole court when she wants to. Petrova is kind of a juggernaut as well. Both of these girls remind me of the old East German swim team. They're big, they're mean, and they're effective as hell. Do I enjoy their tennis? I do more than Sharapova and her ilk because it seems to me that Petrova and Kuznetsova have a little more court sense and vareity. Nothing like Hings or Henin, but more than the others.

The ruination of the WTA is Sharapova and Serena and their ilk. I don't like either of their games or demanors. I am glad to see some of the counterpunchers in the game give back a little of what they took for a number of years from these hit and hope players.

 

[Lau Shui Lin]

I usually watch WTA, but I sometimes watch ATP.