Live Scores  |  TV Schedule  |  Video  |  Pro Schedule  |  Rankings  |  Players  |  Stats  |  Message Boards  |  Newsletter Subscribe  |  Store
TENNIS.com - Peter Bodo's TennisWorld - A Lesson from Luis Horna
   Features
   Backcourt  
   Instruction
   Gear
   College Tennis
   Community
   Travel
   Classifieds
TENNIS.com Blogs
   TennisWorld
   Concrete Elbow
   Champions' Perspective
   Backcourt: Framed
   Ready, Set, Goal: Kellie
   Ready, Set, Goal: Joe
   ATP Fantasy Blog
  
  
  
  
  
  
TENNIS Magazine
   Gift Subscription
   Purchase Back Issues
   Current Issue
   Past Issues
   Customer Care
« Italian Open Crisis Center, Day 5 Italian Open CC Day 5, extended »
A Lesson from Luis Horna
Posted 05/09/2008 @ 2 :00 PM

Phpxkxfmqam


 

By TW Contributing Writer, Asad Raza

During this part of the year, tennis players spend a lot of time scuffing and beating clay off their shoes.  In my time in Rome, I have yet to see any sportswriters do this, largely because they don't have any clay on their shoes.  They don't get to step onto a court often.  Yesterday, in my ongoing investigation of the particularities of the surface, I got a chance to change that.

Two nights ago, I met a American tennis fan who lives in Rome.  After he got over the shock of my tidings ("He lost?  Nadal LOST!?"), he insisted that I come to his club, the Circolo Tennis Belle Arti.  The next morning, I hit balls with a pro there, Matteo Falqui.  Afterwards, I talked to him about what skills he thought were important for clay-court players to learn (through the translation of my kind American friend.)  Matteo told me that developing lots of topspin, unsurprisingly, was the number one priority.  He also echoed what many players have said this week: an important clay virtue is patience.

I learned at least as much from watching how Matteo hit the ball: right away, I noticed that it was impossible for me to rush him, thanks to the extra beat of time that clay gives to the ball.  I also noticed that he slid only on certain balls, tended to hit dropshots off my dropshots, and was expert at "holding" until the last second before telegraphing whether he was going crosscourt or down the line.  All of this adjusted the conventional ideas about clay: not only stamina, but deception become more important when you can't simply hit through the court. 

In general, what occurred to me from the visit is that hardcourt tennis has horizontal vectors--the ball must be hit PAST the opponent--whereas on clay the vertical dimension of the court is utilized--you must hit balls the opponent is unable to reach, whether short, long, or wide.  An interesting corollary here: given the importance of the frontcourt area as a source of winning shots, I believe that volleying and net play are more important aspects of the terra rossa game than is generally appreciated.  Matteo confirmed this as his view as well.  Then we had an appropriately colored glass of freshly squeezed blood orange juice in the club's bar (they don't have that in East River Park), and I was on my way.

(A sentimental aside: after leaving the club, I came upon a typical Roman water fountain.  These are stone mounds from which water continually streams from a protruding steel pipe.  To drink from them, you block the steady flow with your fingers, diverting to a smaller hole pointing upwards.  I'd seen them and been wanting to try one, and, still thirsty from tennis, I did.  The water was very cold.  Standing there on the street, hunched over a stone fountain under a pale blue sky, with a couple of miles of beautiful strolling along the Tiber between myself and the Foro Italico, I had the thought: this is happiness.  Maybe it was the endorphins from the tennis.  Anyway.)

The lineup on Pietroangeli yesterday included Djokovic, Federer, and Roddick, but I wanted to see the last day of singles play on Campo 1, the second-largest court at the Foro during this year of construction.  The first matchup was irresistable: the Peruvian Davis Cup hero, Luis Horna, versus one of the tour's great entertainers and serial monogamists, Radek Stepanek.  Also intriguing was the stylistic matchup: Horna is a true South American claydog, complete with the classic one-handed backhand,  while Stepanek continues to bamboozle the tour with his serve-and-volley game.

Stepanek was not as clownish as he was in his five-set encounter with Djokovic at last year's U.S. Open--here he seemed more intent on reminding Horna of the pecking order, scowling and doing a kind of combination kissing/spitting pantomime every so often (the kiss-off?).  The emotional currents of the match (and they were not undercurrents) were crucial here, as neither player possessed the game to dominate the other. 

Horna Horna's face has lined and his hairline has receded a bit since I last saw him, and the more weathered look seems better to reveal his essential characteristic: tenacity.  The low-to-the-ground Peruvian has never had the massive power to hit others off the court, instead, he uses a Lleyton Hewitt-like level of perseverance to win matches.  It's humbling to realize the amount of work and commitment it takes for this player merely to stay afloat--he's currently ranked 111. 

After Stepanek took the first, Horna's natural intensity showed and he ran through the second set, 6-1, just playing solid backcourt tennis.  At that point, Stepanek took an injury timeout, which seemed to settle him.  Horna played a loose game to get broken at 2-3.  Trying to break back, Luis smashed his racquet, cursed under his breath, and screamed into a towel, but to no avail.  You could see that Horna, who wins with struggle and intensity, couldn't quite help himself with his emotions yesterday.  Much of it, I thought, was the pressure of an opponent who was forcing the action, getting to net and daring you to hit perfect passes.

It may have been the lowest profile match of the day, but Stepanek-Horna also held some important lessons about clay (just as Karlovic-Federer did later).  When I asked Horna if he was surprised by how often Stepanek was up there.  He replied,

"No.  That's the way he plays.  I knew he was going to serve and volley a lot and try to play aggressive all the time.  There are still a few players playing that way on clay or hard or grass or whatever.  That's the way he plays and we all know that, and I was ready to have that kind of match."

I then wondered if the fast courts of Rome had anything to do with this.  Horna dismissed the idea:

"He's been in the finals or semis in Hamburg and it's the slowest clay court in the tour.  I think he's a very fit player and he knows how to play and he can play in any surfaces."

Horna, in other words, seemed convinced that success on clay can be had with a serve-and-volley game, even on the slowest of surfaces--it's the level at which that game is played that's important.  We all that Nadal is an good net player as well, and uses the skill often.  What watching Stepanek showed me was that you can come in consistently against seasoned claydogs and it doesn't have to be a suicide mission.  We'll see if that remains the case against Federer.

Later I watched Karlovic make Federer nervous and then Roddick outscrap Italy's hope, Simone Bolelli, with true clay-court patience and nice use of the "reset" high topspin ball to get himself back into points.  Roddick won the match with perseverance, confidence and tenacity, a formula that I think works on any surface. 

So I'm still compiling information about the Italian Open surface, and how it differs from other red clay events (interesting note: every player mentions Rome's high bounce); today I'll be watching the quarterfinals to see what's happening in the topmost echelon of the tour. But yesterday was a reminder that players, not styles, win matches.

| | Send to a Friend
Comments

first!

second...We gotta see mug shot already? OUCH!

Beautiful stuff, great insights.

If I was there with you Asad I'd have been watching Horna too. Steppy sure took his risk-taking game up a notch in the tiebreak I just watched a few moments ago.

I guess when Mapes said over at the CC thread that she's going to "crawl" away somewhere she meant here. . . hang in there, hon. Isn't this just another terrific piece of writing from Asad?

More great stuff, Asad!

Couldn't agree more on these 2 things, especially when put together: "it's the level at which that game is played that's important" and "a reminder that players, not styles, win matches." And Stepanek reminded us of this again today, eh?

You even got to play some on the red stuff yourself while in Rome??? Quite the complete experience you're having over there. Happy for you. Interesting clay confirmations from Matteo as well. (aaahhhh, just had to type that name...."Matteo" is my favorite Italian man's name ;) )

hee hee, Pete. I'm too bummed to read this yet. I'll let you know.

Just shows that Rome clay is not really representative of RG clay.
Monte Carlo I think represents RG the best.

Heck, all claycourt players (including Fed, Nad, Ferrer, Davy, etc) were eliminated!

Who is the author of this piece? I can't find a byline. thanks.

Hey Guys, I didn't mean for Stepanek to confirm my thoughts so quickly!!!

Just got back from Roger's press conference--he wasn't in a great mood, as you'd expect. I figured I better ask him to confirm my theory himself, so I asked him the following question and got the following answer:

Q. Does his taking your rhythm away and coming to the net a lot in that match demonstrate that people playing and attacking style can succeed on clay, and is that something that you think about doing yourself at the French this year?

ROGER FEDERER: Well, all of a sudden maybe I'll be serve and volleying first, second serve, you never know. But I have my doubts some reason. I don't know why.

But of course when a guy serves well, you know, and he backs it up with a good volley behind, you know, he's tough to play for everyone.

But I don't think that's the way to win the French Open, to be honest.

New Flash: Justine has withdrawn from Rome. I told you guys she was injured that is the real reason why she has been losing these matches. She has too much pride that is why she won't say anything. At least now we know the reason for the slump.

Pete,

you remember Adriano Panatta, don't know. He had great success playing s&v tennis on clay. It can be done, if you have the right kind of tennis mind.

That's why Sampras' inability to even be competitive on clay doesn't make any sense. With his game he should have been a semifinalist at Roland Garros every year, like Fed is.

Maybe it's like what you said, he just wasn't good enough; not so much physically but more mentally. He didn't have the patience, the subtlety.

robredo's top spin lob has been on hire today. sadly, other parts of his game are not.

Asad - man - your timing is just impeccable on this one - as is your writing! Its so true that any style can win, as long as its executed well, but that's the trick, no?

*slinks off in search of a tequilla bottle to crawl into*

oops...wrong thread. sorry.

omar: Sampras never seemed to be that comfortable moving on clay. Contrast his movement on that surface compared to other attacking players like Edberg and Stich, both of whom grew up playing on clay.

Hehe

RS

Radek Stepanek endorses himself ..

Whoops! I was in such a hurry to post this that I forgot to add Asad's by-line. It's fixed now. My apologies!

What exactly is "blood orange juice" Pete? If it's metaphor it's completely lost on me. If you mean the Italian oranges are red-colored instead of orange-colored, maybe it would be clearer to just say that?

Reckoner, I won't speak for the author, Asad, but blood oranges are actually a type of orange. His description was literal.

You almost knew that Stepanek was dangerous and timed your piece on him pretty well. The response from Federer to your question was interesting. You dont know if he agreed with your point or disagreed. Thanks for sharing your views on the tournament and about Rome.

Asad, what's a blood orange?

asad: great as always!!
so this time did the Fed looked to his right or to his left when entering the room for the press conference? ;) (I'm referring to another piece Asad wrote last year about Fed)

I think Stepanek played magnificent today and this despite the crowd and all...It just made me realized how fantastic his "attacking" serve is. But, I'm still wondering what happened to Fed's own ? 100% in the first set then only 40% in the second?? Was it a technical glitch or just a "mental" one. I don't know, but I hope to see it fixed for Hamburg and RG.

Rafa against Stepanek on clay? I don't want to see that happening too soon !!!

Omar:

"That's why Sampras' inability to even be competitive on clay doesn't make any sense. With his game he should have been a semifinalist at Roland Garros every year, like Fed is.

Maybe it's like what you said, he just wasn't good enough; not so much physically but more mentally. He didn't have the patience, the subtlety"

What made Sampras a not very good player on clay was his movement. He never learned to move well on the stuff (he grew up playing hc tennis in RPV CA at JAck Kramer tc).

Let me make it a bit clearer. If you see matches of Pete on clay you would see that when playing a rally from the baseline when pulled wide to the bh and in the process of recovering (to cover the possible fh) if the opposing player hit back to Pete's bh he would often hit the bh OFF HIS LEFT LEG.

This is a begginers play on the red stuff.

PP was way too used to blow people to pieces on grass or hcs... he couldn't do it on clay, and never quite learned to move on it. If he had spent time as a junior developing his skills to win RG (as oposed to focusing on Wimby) there is no doubt he had the talent to do so.

Unfortunately for him he never really learned to move on clay (well enough ofcourse to compete with the worlds elite).


Hey, Asad - Nice post - and great that you got to play over there after all... brave questioning of Fed after today's loss...

You almost knew that Stepanek was dangerous and timed your piece on him pretty well. The response from Federer to your question was interesting. You dont know if he agreed with your point or disagreed. Thanks for sharing your views on the tournament and about Rome.

re-oranges: in French they're called "sanguines" or "bloody"-oranges too.

They're delicious !!

http://www.fotolia.com/id/7197864

Hey guys, don't look now, but Andy Roddick is in with a chance at this title!

Also, Pete's right, blood oranges have deep red flesh are quite common in Italy.

I see. Thanks Pete. And nevermind, Asad.

here they are:
http://users.kymp.net/citruspages/bream%20tarocco%20j.jpg

This post moves faster than Sampras on clay.

Viva le worm!

There there Fed, always next time.

Asad (aka Ray):

Great work here today. You're bringing the games home to us in a way that even watching them on the TV ourselves could never even BEGIN to compare.

Hey, I'm beginning to NOT miss Bodo (just kiddin', Pete).

Your best, I think, was your point about using the vertical vectors, hitting short and wide, and essentially making the balls drop just short of your opponent's reach. Excellent, stuff, that. Quite possibly the best I've read on TW.

No reports as yet on the legendary Italian beauties?! I'm hurt... but hopeful.

Stepanek played the same way he played at Montreal, eventually losing a first set TB 8-6.

"[When a guy serves well, you know, and he backs it up with a good volley behind, you know, he's tough to play for everyone."

Yup.

Most times Federer has found a way past the Czech. Not today. I thought Stepanek used the corners beautifully, and flummoxed Federer with his serve placement.

Your point about forecourt play on clay is also bang on. One reason Nadal is so hard to beat is that he wins forecourt rallies consistently.

Good job, Asad.


"Bye Bye Federer":Stepanek won because of Vaidisova!!

(beware-for the ones who can speak and understand Italian)

http://www.repubblica.it/2008/05/sezioni/sport/tennis-3/federer-eliminato/federer-eliminato.html

hi asad, nice job ;)
sometime hapiness is just the sum of plenty of little things !

regarding you question to roger, you are looking like a consumate repporter and not a rookie ;) good on you !!!

i'm surprised and not that surprised that fed doesn't believe in constant offense whether it implies coming to the net to win on clay... most of the best players know how to go from defense to more offense if needed... if you are constantly pushed back you can't simply win... rafa does this better than anyone, you simply don't find ways to come in from any part of the court.

i'm hanging on your next piece !

btw, how are the italian woman comparing the ones from new york ?
more or less the same fashionistas ? hehe !

Asad - Keep up the good work scholar; I've been watching Rome on TV daily and watching the site for your updates. I second Friedman here - that's wild that you got the invite to play on some clay. Midtown Tennis it was not, I'm thinking...

Asad Stonada,
This post and you Ways of Clay posts (and some others on Steve's blog too) have been a true pleasure to read this week.

Asad, thanks for this piece. I enjoyed it very much, esp. the comparisons between clay and hardcourt play.

The livestreaming commentators today remarked on the success of serve and volley on clay, both by Stepanek and by Roddick. Is it making a comeback on clay just when it seems to be dead on hardcourt?

What a rich, educational, beautiful and fun post!

Thanks for all the great info on playing on clay. I'm eating this stuff up.

What so shocking about Nadal lost? He only had one perfect clay seasons. ..Hell if he lost then he lost. Nadal is still the best clay player today and nobody can do what he does on court today...Man people talk to much for nothing.

Yes Ray, I'll have to heap more praise onto your already steaming pile. Very professional, insightful, and beautifully articulated piece.

I especially liked and agreed with all of your points on successful clay court tennis, especially the vertical aspect of winning points. Brilliant.

More asides please! AND you were able to ask Federer a question! Does it get any better?

*applauding warmly* ray, what a beautifully written piece, underscored poignantly by today's exciting (surreal, too, perhaps?) quarterfinal between roger and radek.

thank you for being the eyes and heart of TW at rome. it is truly an honour.

svelterogue

Asad,

What level do you play at? Just curious to know what kinds of speeds you are talking about w.r.t. the extra time.

I'm thinking roddick has a decent shot at the title. stan was pushed by blake and we all know that roddick is better than james.

Federer played way too passive. He would hit deep groundstrokes and back up. It almost looked like he was working on his grounstrokes. He sometimes plays waiting for his opponents to miss. In my view, Stepenak is a player that Federer feels he will never meet at the end of Grand Slams. Hence, he is not really up for the match. You can see the difference when he played Djokovic at Monte Carlo. He attacked and REALLY wanted to beat him.

Really looking forward to tonights matches. especially a-rod taking on stan.

lets go roddick!

I told you so.
One wonders, as Sampras pointed out....could Roger federerr have dominated the game the way he has, had he played in the early 90's witht he variety of playing styles around tht are not around now......Edberg followed by Chang, followed by Becker, then Agassi, then rafter......Fed has always seemed to me to be somewhat vulnerabel toa serve and volley game....as Stepanek has proven....on clay

roddick is up in 1 and a half hours appr. ( I think :- )

Hey guys, just got to the Foro--Ivanisevic and Rafter just played a match on the main court, as part of the seniors tour.

Slice-And-Dice, glad you're enjoying my stuff, I was remembering a long-ago analysis of Disco Tommy's windshield-wiper forehand and your recommendation that he extend through the hitting zone rather than upwards, while I was watching him and Andy yesterday.

MD, I'm an average club player--4.0 level, give or take.

Fed was being too conservative against Stepanek. His backhand always went cc. Stepanek's serves at breakpoints bailed him out many times and his deep volleys kept Fed off balance all day. I have never seen Fed passed so poorly. Maybe Fed is not ready w/o Nadal waiting for him in a claycourt touranment. Nevertheless, the game was decided on who played the crucial points better and Stepanek deserved to win. I don't think Stepanek style of play will bother Nadal who has a stronger defensive mind/game on clay than Fed. This is a tough loss which may benefit Fed's body but not his confidence. Forget this match fast, Fed.

Nicely written. I've had the chance to play on terra rossa once, in Spain a few years back, and I had a dickens of a time on it. I'd like to give it another go sometime. We have a few har tru here in DC but I've yet to step on it.

I'd be curious as to how many folks here play on the dirt and how often.

What's Pete's rating? I've always wondered that...

Roddick is old ha ha ...man that guy is bad. good thing he don't act. He just lost again and again ..come on lazy Andy. How many more lost till you get your clay game on? Don't tell me Novak Djokovic is going to feel dizzy again today? ..Is the womens the only one that know how to play? Then again tennis has this dumb no break rule cause of Tv deal B.S...Man honestly take care your players. This is real sport not some fake wrestling deal.

Ace--
you actually hit upon an important point. Fed was actually looking to playing Rafa in the final, but R. lost, and Fed lost interest it looked, deep deep down. He seemed, as you say to be practicing...but his bh shanks must be very very disconcerting to him and Higueras. Can some accomplished here, including Asad (nice post) address this here? Looking forward to the reply.
vladh0007

RE: THE ITALIAN MASTERS

This is the worst Masters I have ever seen,RAFA gets injurged,FERRER was problely tired,and poor FED seen defeat at the hands of a nut. This new scheuling of the clay court season affected almost everone except the ass(Nole)because he had some time to rest,by quiting on the FED. I do not concider Nole a winner or a champion of this series,you can more or less say he got there almost free and at the unfortunate demise of everyone else. THE FED shocked me yesterday with his clay court playing-we all know he is better than that trole that beat him(he played very poorly). At the end everyone opted out,so you cannot say he (Nole)is a terrific player,he was the only one alive to play. I can see now why the SPANISH players think they were ripped off because of this impossible schedule,they were either hurt or tired(looks like a set-up to me). If this kind of thing continouse to happens it will ruin TENNIS for all of us,so if any of you want to call this arrogant,no princeable,redicious,chilish ass a champion, who does not respect other players or the game itself-then you have not been watching the game very long or you are just willing to look over his faults. THE FED is still #1 and RAFA is still #2 to me and are good ambassidors,that are aware of other players feelings. HE CAN WIN but HE AIN'T NO TRUE CHAMPION.

HAIL RAFA and THE FED to the end.

'......Fed has always seemed to me to be somewhat vulnerabel toa serve and volley game..'

When Federer lost in the last few years to steady baseliners, it was thought that he was a little vulnerable against that type of game, and his most recent loss is attributed to his weakness against serve and volley style as well?

Asad,

I play at a similar level...never thought it would make a difference at our pace...very interesting. Great question to TMF, and I think his response points to a larger issue. To implement a strategy, you really need to be a believer. I guess he doesn't think an out and out attack is the way to go, which is surprising considering that all the sets he got against Nadal came by playing that way. Actually, over the years, I've noticed TMF getting more and more defensive (if that's the right word)...employing the slice a lot more often, not running around as many backhands, and relying more on his serve. (I wish we could get stats to back this up). He's still a great player, and perhaps the greatest, but something's changed since early last year (though the Master's cup was a beautiful exception).

Roger lost to a 29 year old journeyman ranked in the 20s who has never won anything in his whole career and whose HIGHEST RANKING ever is World #8. Roger's been a well-earned and well-deserved World #1 (not what Asad wants to think, he praises Rafa, Andy and everybody else, even journeyman Stepanek, more than Roger, who he never praises consistently or at all) forever seemingly (more than 4 years straight already actually in reality).
This Radek guy is the same guy that Roger had beaten easily in each of their last 4 matches prior and obviously should beat easily (who shouldn't Roger beat?). That is what is so telling and worrisome about his prospects for the rest of his career going forward. He has lost numerous matches the last 6-7 months when he won more total points (numerous losses, including this one), but played horribly (his worst) during the most critical and important points of the match, gifting many free, easy UNforced errors to his overmatched opponents (should be) and lost them all and the match when in the previous few years, he had played his best and won them all and the match, as recently as the US Open final last year versus Novak. He can't play the pressure and clutch points well anymore against anyone that he used to do it against. His level really dropped. All his opponents play the same way versus him: return balls, and hope he misses. It's worked a lot this year already. That strategy has caused him to lose 6 matches already this year.
How will he ever win another GS title, his 13th, when he can't win any critical, clutch pressure points that he needs in his occasional close sets and matches against anybody, not even against a 29 year old journeyman? It's simple. He won't win anymore Slams unless he blows everyone out all 7 matches, which he could do and has done in the past, but not often, not recently and not anymore.
He's finished. His career is over. He's done. His tennis obituary and RestINPeace sign and writing is on his 26 year old body and wall, and it's just increasing every month. It's already at the point now when every tournament with Roger's somehow all of a sudden low confidence, still low fitness, bad in tiebreaks and up breaks in sets, Roger could lose to anyone now, even in 1st rounds of Grand Slams to qualifiers and Ruben Ramirez Hidalgo (#100 something in the world) types that he used to, for a long time consistently, regularly blow off the court with his patience, movement and superior talent advantage. Now, it's not such a given anymore.
He's lost to numerous players recently (Nalbandian twice, Gonzalez, Murray, Roddick, Fish, Stepanek) that he shouldn't ever lose to and hadn't lost to in a very long time or ever before. Now, it's become increasingly common and less surprising. His level and confidence and game has slipped clearly, and these inferior to him players are all taking advantage of it when they play him. That's bad and unfortunate, but until Roger plays well again, he will continue losing or almost losing more and more often in tournaments and to people he shuld beat and win against, like Stepanek and everyone else, except, maybe Rafa on clay (Roger has won Hamburg clay 4 times and beat Rafa last year in final, Rafa's never won there once). Roger is a physically and mentally weaker version of himself now. He's not getting any better, and he's in complete denial of the facts, reality and worse performance and results. That's typical of a former great, long-time champion who is in decline, knows it, but doesn't want to think or admit it. He shows this in clutch and pressure situations in all his very close losses now, which he didn't do before usually. Now he loses points, games, sets, matches and service breaks that he never used to lose against the same players he never used to lose to. If that's not evidence of his declining confidence, fitness and play, then nothing is ever.

This serve and volley game is just a false excuse. Roger plays it himself, and when he wants to play it well, he's the best player at it and the best player at everything, except for serving and movement (he's still amongst the best).
I have a question for everyone: If Roger loses and struggles so much versus serve and volleyers like Stepanek, then why had Roger beaten Radek the last 4 straight matches they played head to head and blown him out in some sets? Why?

It's certainly not because Radek is better than he's ever been before at 29 years old. He should be in decline at that age, 3 years older than Roger is. His ranking and overall play has actually dropped overall, as has his results, honestly and factually. Yes, Roger is in decline. His results, performance, play, wins, losses, 1 title, etc. this year and declining results and play last year prove it too. PROOF. FACTS.

Federer's loss against Stepanek, Fish etc. only testifies to the depth in the men's game. Over the course of one's career, even a top player will lose to players in the top 100 or ranked lower down. One only has to check the atp website to check the losses suffered by other top players in the last 20/30 years.

Federer's loss to Stepanek is part and parcel of the game - just reflects the vicissitude of a top player's career. When compared to the 'monster' ( to quote Federer himself ) that Federer created, the expectations on Federer is also and more often than not unrealistic.

People who dismiss Fish, Stepanek etc. obviously do not understand the game well.

typo at 4:33 p.m..should be 'is also monstrous...'

No one has responded to my entreaty to explain all those bh shanks
by Federer...please? some good player? is he taking his eye off the ball too soon to see where it is going? also did that 33 stroke rally on that 4-1 point (2nd set TB) exhaust him?

No one has responded to my entreaty to explain all those bh shanks
by Federer...please? some good player? is he taking his eye off the ball too soon to see where it is going? also did that 33 stroke rally on that 4-1 point (2nd set TB) exhaust him?

"Unfortunately for him he never really learned to move on clay (well enough of course to compete with the worlds elite)."

And yet, Sampras beat just about all the world's elite on clay at some point in time in his career and at RG no less, but because he didn't win the French, he seemingly doesn't get much credit.

That said, I'd suggest Pete's biggest problem was mostly belief and some really difficult draws at RG when the amount of great clay-court specialists was at its deepest.

Vladimir,

I think Asad had suggested that the bh shanks might have something to do with his racquet. I would suggest reading the reviews of the racquet by 5.0+ players at: tenniswarehouse.com. Small head, heavy racquet...probably explains the shanks. TMF seems to be like Samprass in that he doesn't want to experiment with different racquets.

The comments to this entry are closed.

« Italian Open Crisis Center, Day 5 Italian Open CC Day 5, extended »

More from TennisWorld
Concrete Elbow by Steve Tignor

More from Concrete Elbow
TENNIS Magazine is published 10 times per year.




Save 75% off of the annual newsstand price.
Categories
2005
2006
2007
2008
ATP Championships 06
ATPchamps07
Australian Open 2005
Australian Open 2006
Australian Open 2007
Australian Open 2008
Battlefield Reports
Big Winners, Big Losers
Blogging Advisory
Books, DVDs, etc.
Breaking News
By The Letters
Clay Game
Coaches
Contests
Controversy/Scandal
Corrections
Davis Cup
Dispatch From the Front
Fed Cup
Friday Features
Guest Contributors
In Memoriam
Injury Report
Interviews
Junior Game
KeyBiscayne2008
Miscellaneous
Monday Net Post
Nasdaq100 2005
Nasdaq100 2006
NCAA Tennis
New to TennisWorld?
Off Topic
Olympics
On Vacation
Other Sports
PacLife Open 2005
PacLife Open 2006
PacLife Open 2007
PacLife Open 2008
Players - Female Pros
Players - Juniors
Players - Male Pros
Players - Other
Pressroom
Recap 2006
Roland Garros 2005
Roland Garros 2006
Roland Garros 2007
Roland Garros 2008
Senior Game
Sony-Ericsson 2007
State of the Game
Statistics
Sunday Brunch
TennisWorld FAQs
The Deuce Club
The Locker Room
The OTher Thread
The Watercooler
Tournaments
Tribe
TW Site Rules
US Open 2005
US Open 2006
USOpen2007
Wednesday Racket
Wimbledon 2005
Wimbledon 2006
Wimbledon 2007
Wimbledon2008
World Team Tennis
WTA Championships 06
Your Call
Recent Entries
21st Century Girl
Your Call, Aug. 21
Your Call, Aug. 20
Farewell, Beijing
Your Call, August 19th
Monday Net Post
Men of Iron
Olympic CC, Sunday
OCC Saturday, Resumed
The OCC: Saturday
Champs or Chumps?
OCC Over-overflow?
OCC Friday, Prefaced
The Deuce Club, 8.14
The OCC: Thursday
Search
Statistics
This blog currently has 1751 entries and 462415 comments.