 |
|
Marcos Baghdatis and the End of Tennis History
|
03/14/2010 - 9:00 PM
|
 |
Posted by Jesse |
03/14/2010 at 09:47 PM |
WOW.. tennis becoming a baseline game. Groundbreaking stuff Steve. |
Posted by Sunny |
03/14/2010 at 10:38 PM |
2nd |
Posted by athan from Philippines |
03/14/2010 at 10:40 PM |
Timely indeed. We were just resting between sets yesterday at the tennis club and we were discussing the difficulty of winning points from the baseline if the match is balanced. We observed how both of us can be more sure of winning the point only if we come to the net to take charge. And these are club players who are talking, putting premium on charging the net.
We also commented on the lack of net-rushers particularly at the women's tour. How points are won by hitting harder and harder from the baseline until one commits error. No more construction of points, no more thinking of the next 2 to 3 points. No more Hingis, no more Mc Enroe.
We also acknowledeged that technology has a lot to answer for these problems now.
That is really sad. |
Posted by jcjslacker |
03/14/2010 at 11:57 PM |
so here's the thing imho.
soon, some tournament director will figure out that they want to be the
"fast court tourney" and bill it as 'the fastest court east of england'
or some such thing. personally, i think it would be great if it was miami
so we could have an american slow court / american fast court combo...
|
Posted by JimF |
03/15/2010 at 12:27 AM |
Imagine if the Wilson introduced a football that allowed 90 yard field goals, and stuck to the backs of receivers' hands so no one ever dropped a football. Do you think the NFL would allow it to be used -- and destroy the sport?
Equipment manufacturers are dictating far too much to the tennis tournaments.
To compensate, they're slowing the courts: Wimbledon is slower than the French Open (until the grass wears off by the semis), and the Australian Open is slower still.
Hitting 90 MPH groundstrokes on balls 6 inches off the ground, from 10 feet behind the baseline, combined with slow courts everywhere makes for bland, homogenous tennis. If the ITF/ATP won't control the equipment, they need to test changing dimensions (net height, service line) something.
|
Posted by Josef |
03/15/2010 at 01:09 AM |
I remember sometime around 1990, the worry was that male tennis was becoming dominated by serve-and-volleyers and getting very boring, with points at Wimbledon lasting about 3 seconds on average. There was talk of eliminating the second serve, shortening the service box... That sort of puts things in a different perspective. I don't think we have anything to worry about. |
Posted by Mike Hunt from Haiti |
03/15/2010 at 01:11 AM |
Thhhhteve, no gratuitous bashing of tea parties? You're slipping, bro.
Way to alienate 70% of your demographic. There are only so many limousine liberals with trust funds and other people's money out there to be your fans.
Looking forward to your next foray into politics, nerdo!
Gee, why is this guy so mad? Gee, why did Pete get so mad?
My invitation to Port-Au-Prince still stands, I'm not that mad. Come on over, won't you? |
Posted by lol |
03/15/2010 at 01:57 AM |
the article is so biased. suddenly djokovic becomes a synonym for 'defensive player' and nadal doesn't get even mentioned in the subject? |
Posted by Charles |
03/15/2010 at 03:14 AM |
I suspect that a volleyer (maybe even a sav-er) might thrive on the pro circuit if that person had the right gifts. A greater problem might be how that person would ever learn it. When players are growing up and a little weak or undersized, the baseline game is maybe easier to win with. But a full-grown adult might be able to win with volleying - but how would they have learned it - players start the game as kids - who changes their game after 18? |
Posted by Johnny |
03/15/2010 at 03:56 AM |
Court slow or fast makes no difference for Djokovic because he can adjust his game to any surface. Besides, did Tignor watch his match last night at all? Couple of shots per point, no long rallies therefore we can't talk about typical baseline play. You can't expect him to return from service box or to play s/v, no one does that these days. Attackers vs defenders division is entirely obsolete today. Top players are capable of attacking while defending practically any time. Federer says he's a baseliner, but is he a defender? I don't think so. Same applies to Djokovic and Murray. They are modern days attackers. |
Posted by Mario Ljubicic |
03/15/2010 at 04:16 AM |
How's our projected winner Cilic going over there in IW? I hope slow courts are still suitable for his combinatorial game and he bagels everyone all the way to the finals with Murray. Murray will beat Roger in semi, even though we saw last year Murray can't play in the wind. Cilic will beat Davydenko in other semi. Vote Cilic for the champion!!! And Henin too!!! |
Posted by VC |
03/15/2010 at 08:48 AM |
Fed was 21/24 at net yesterday and hit some excellent volleys. Granted it was only Hanescu. But it was very aggressive, entertaining tennis. |
Posted by Master Ace |
03/15/2010 at 09:23 AM |
Roger should get a stiff test from Marcos tomorrow. |
Posted by Ian |
03/15/2010 at 09:26 AM |
Steve's writing is as consistant as Baghdatis's "shot-making." |
Posted by Nikos |
03/15/2010 at 10:06 AM |
Marcos tomorrow , will do his miracle.....!!!! |
Posted by TILDEN'S GHOST |
03/15/2010 at 01:13 PM |
Despite his early exit to a guy who'd gone 1-5 this year I'm still picking Cilic to win this thing. Somehow time and space will collapse and create a parallel world in which everything is opposite. Loser chumps will prevail and bad writers/prognosticators will flourish. Your time has come Stevie baby. Oh look.....monkeys are flying out of my butt! Oh well, it was a nice dream..........Toodles |
Posted by BrooklynNY |
03/15/2010 at 02:24 PM |
Radioactive ping pong is cool, but I miss tennis. |
Posted by Cami |
03/15/2010 at 02:33 PM |
Johnny, well said.
Otherwise, I don't think boring tennis depends on the style of play (baseline or s/v). For me personally, two of the most boring players to watch were Courier and Ivanisevic! As different as night and day, and I coulnd't sit through their matches.
It's all up to personal taste, I think. I find Baghdatis and Nalbandian (when they are at the top of their games) very entertainig to watch. Even Davydenko, lately...But for some reason, I cannot warm up to David Ferrer or Leyton Hewitt, and they're baseliners, too.
Technology and fitness may have changed the game, but there will always be a few talented players who will bring their unique style to the game. Just look at Federer, Nadal, Djoko and Murray. I think they all have very distinctive playing syles. |
Posted by amanaceo |
03/15/2010 at 03:49 PM |
Mike Hunt for Haiti - take your baggage to drudgereport or foxnews. |
Posted by NickR |
03/15/2010 at 04:31 PM |
Steve, nice work. I enjoy all your posts, even the more "controversial" ones. I don't think a lot of these readers — especially the ones who consistently spew insults — understand that you're trying to write about something different every day, but you're only covering one sport with an unchanging cast of characters. Therefore, sometimes you have to reach. I'd challenge anyone out there to produce columns as well-written and insightful as yours. Most work, some are tougher to grasp, but they're all very good. Don't let any of these classless malcontents bother you....they just need lives. |
Posted by rkfg |
03/15/2010 at 04:42 PM |
Anyone has a similar thought on that the next phase of evolution after serve and volley and baseline is players frequently hit from no man's land?
|
Posted by Charlie Mueller |
03/15/2010 at 05:01 PM |
Why are they slowing down the courts so much? Isn't it more enteraining and intesting to have changes in the surfaces- such as is so obvious with the hard court, clay, and grass season transitions. I heard that at Wimbledon they open the balls two weeks before the event to slow them down (even more than their heavier weight does). I guess those who manage to pro tour think uniform surfaces are better for the game.
It is almsot killing the women's game. I feel like except for the talented few like the Willians sisters, Clisters, and Henin they are all interchangeable. It IS boring. |
Posted by TennisFan |
03/15/2010 at 11:03 PM |
So what exactly do you miss Steve? Ace 15-0, Ace 30-0, Ace 40-0, Ace game, games? Or Serve-volley 15-0, server-volley 30-0, server-volley 40-0, serve-volley - game games?
With guys like Roger and Rafa tennis has become more interesting. These are all surface guys, ooh-aah rally guys. So what exactly is wrong with power baseline game? Which of Rafa-Roger 5 setters did you find boring?
Reporters like Steve were the ones who were clamoring for reducing the serves to a single serve in Sampras era as tennis was become boring boom-boom game.
If anyhting, todays 30 stroke rallies, unbelievable angles and craft is better than yesteryears.
And guys who add more craft to raw baseline hitting, mainly Roger, and sometimes Rafa, show us how much further apart they can be from others.
If someone believes that today's guys cannot volley - they should look at the highlight point of 'hit for hiati' match and look at Roger's volleying.
Tennis has evolved for better - and will always evolve for better. Everything does. There would be more amazing Rogers to come. And the current Roger has been acknowledged by most past players as better than them.
Only some curmudgeons stick to the past nostalgia. Someone send these guys to postal mail era. |
Posted by JJ |
03/17/2010 at 10:26 AM |
I guess Marcos's "style" wasn't too bad after all... |
Posted by Ryan |
03/25/2010 at 06:21 PM |
Geez. Steve is the best writer on this site, and people trash him left and right. You people are losers. |
We are no longer accepting comments for this entry.
|
|
|