tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 02 Feb 2009 10:04:30
From: Raja
Subject: Should AO switch to clay?
Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
with one.

It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
as well.




 
Date: 03 Feb 2009 01:35:20
From: xamigax@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
On 2 f=E9v, 22:14, zepflo...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Feb 2, 3:06=A0pm, "xami...@gmail.com" <xami...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 2 f=E9v, 19:04, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> > > courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> > > with one.
>
> > > It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> > > will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> > > try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> > > Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on cla=
y
> > > as well.
>
> > If you want other surface for the AO, why not going back to grass?
> > This will allow Wimby to retune their own into faster, lower bouncing
> > grass, if aussies were to go for a "slower grass" (as Wimb as turned
> > to be).
>
> > In other words, what about rooting for traditionnal "old school"
> > tennis?
> > Ban anything over 95 Sqare Inches.
>
> > That's possibly the only way to prevent more and more bumrooting & 2h-
> > bh.
> > The level of the game will suffer, many players will loose a lot...
> > But once the transition is done, welcome back to more creativity &
> > angles.
> > Welcome back to less tall & muscle players, artists a la Mac /
> > Leconte / Mecir / Arazi / and most (if not all) Indian players style.
> > Welcome back to the net equilibrists a la Edberg / Rafter.
> > Tennis needs to take more care (as humans should) of its biodiversity.
>
> > The most questioning thing about Lendl is how unfair he is considered
> > (only because of supposed "political" views), even here.
> > He was the one who took tennis into the muscle top-fitness / power
> > groundstrockes business.
> > Give Lendl credits for most of the way tennis is played today.
> > Nadal is the true reincarnation of Lendl.
> > Just as Ivan, he has got into the head of the "top artist" of his era.
> > Just as Ivan, he plays from the baseline.
> > Also have a two handed backhand.
> > Like Ivan, he now has won the Australian.
> > Like Lendl, he won the French several times.
> > Unlike Ivan, he has allready won Wimby.
> > Unlike Ivan he will probably never make height USO finals in a row.
>
> > My lord, hope Federer won't quit as MacEnroe did!
>
> > Before Ivan, tennis players were often what you call now journeymen.
> > They enjoyed playing the game... and the parties right after!
> > Tennis was a sport for the "bons vivants"...
> > Money damaged the surroundings first: ATP took it way too far into the
> > "serious" attitudes, blaming players for "abuses", forcing them into
> > too polished behaviour.
> > No more jokes with neither the guy on the chair or on the other side
> > of the net, nor with the crowd.
> > Money then damaged the players attitudes (not even talking about
> > juicing), encouraging them into low risk =A0& zero fantasy gamestyle.
>
> > I do not want all that old fashioned stuffs "for granted" (settled by
> > some contract, like on the Legend Tour, with Mensour), I wish players
> > were not that much under the "polite" politics from the ATP...
> > It has become way much closer to Disney's dialogues than to real life
> > ones.
>
> > That's also why I liked pretty much both Federer & Djokovic's
> > reactions about the fact that bookies were making Murray as #1 fav,
> > and that some "experts" followed the bookies into that non-sense.
>
> > Share & Enjoy,
> > Manolo
>
> McEnroe didnt quit. He temporarily went off and came back and got his
> ass handed to once again by Lendl. In 1985 only Lendl was kicking his.
> In 1987 even Becker and Edberg joined in the fun.
>
> The worst thing Fed can do is pull a McEnroe and go in temporary
> retirement. He is stupid but not that stupid.

Yep, I knew all that.
That's what a call neverending or part-time quitting.
A thing possible only if you start it very early, a la Agassi.
And even then, Agassi changed a lot mentally during his off days.
Mac didn't that much.
Maybe he felt that resting a bit will cut down a huge part of the
pressure he was probably putting on himself, and not having such
pressure to deal with will help him to go back to the top quickly...
Very wrong.

Whatever, Mac never was the same again...(I mean, tennis wise.
Mentally he simply got "over-Mac'd")
I remember him a more a caricature of himself, the one who got busted
from the AO, while playing Michael Pernfors... What a joke.
As if Mac had been back to test the new "be polite, never argue" rules
from the ATP.

Share & Enjoy,
Manolo


 
Date: 03 Feb 2009 08:20:07
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
Raja wrote:
> Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> with one.
>
> It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> as well.

Troll post? Non-clay courts are already slow enough and clay tennis is boring.




 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 13:14:37
From:
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
On Feb 2, 3:06=A0pm, "xami...@gmail.com" <xami...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On 2 f=E9v, 19:04, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> > courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> > with one.
>
> > It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> > will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> > try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> > Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> > as well.
>
> If you want other surface for the AO, why not going back to grass?
> This will allow Wimby to retune their own into faster, lower bouncing
> grass, if aussies were to go for a "slower grass" (as Wimb as turned
> to be).
>
> In other words, what about rooting for traditionnal "old school"
> tennis?
> Ban anything over 95 Sqare Inches.
>
> That's possibly the only way to prevent more and more bumrooting & 2h-
> bh.
> The level of the game will suffer, many players will loose a lot...
> But once the transition is done, welcome back to more creativity &
> angles.
> Welcome back to less tall & muscle players, artists a la Mac /
> Leconte / Mecir / Arazi / and most (if not all) Indian players style.
> Welcome back to the net equilibrists a la Edberg / Rafter.
> Tennis needs to take more care (as humans should) of its biodiversity.
>
> The most questioning thing about Lendl is how unfair he is considered
> (only because of supposed "political" views), even here.
> He was the one who took tennis into the muscle top-fitness / power
> groundstrockes business.
> Give Lendl credits for most of the way tennis is played today.
> Nadal is the true reincarnation of Lendl.
> Just as Ivan, he has got into the head of the "top artist" of his era.
> Just as Ivan, he plays from the baseline.
> Also have a two handed backhand.
> Like Ivan, he now has won the Australian.
> Like Lendl, he won the French several times.
> Unlike Ivan, he has allready won Wimby.
> Unlike Ivan he will probably never make height USO finals in a row.
>
> My lord, hope Federer won't quit as MacEnroe did!
>
> Before Ivan, tennis players were often what you call now journeymen.
> They enjoyed playing the game... and the parties right after!
> Tennis was a sport for the "bons vivants"...
> Money damaged the surroundings first: ATP took it way too far into the
> "serious" attitudes, blaming players for "abuses", forcing them into
> too polished behaviour.
> No more jokes with neither the guy on the chair or on the other side
> of the net, nor with the crowd.
> Money then damaged the players attitudes (not even talking about
> juicing), encouraging them into low risk =A0& zero fantasy gamestyle.
>
> I do not want all that old fashioned stuffs "for granted" (settled by
> some contract, like on the Legend Tour, with Mensour), I wish players
> were not that much under the "polite" politics from the ATP...
> It has become way much closer to Disney's dialogues than to real life
> ones.
>
> That's also why I liked pretty much both Federer & Djokovic's
> reactions about the fact that bookies were making Murray as #1 fav,
> and that some "experts" followed the bookies into that non-sense.
>
> Share & Enjoy,
> Manolo

McEnroe didnt quit. He temporarily went off and came back and got his
ass handed to once again by Lendl. In 1985 only Lendl was kicking his.
In 1987 even Becker and Edberg joined in the fun.

The worst thing Fed can do is pull a McEnroe and go in temporary
retirement. He is stupid but not that stupid.



 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 13:12:13
From:
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
On Feb 2, 2:42=A0pm, "jdeluise" <jdelu...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On =A02-Feb-2009, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 2, 1:00=A0pm, "jdeluise" <jdelu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On =A02-Feb-2009, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Har=
d
> > > > courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> > > > with one.
>
> > > > It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. Thi=
s
> > > > will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse a=
nd
> > > > try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena=
,
> > > > Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on c=
lay
> > > > as well.
>
> > > What about Wimbledon in this case?
>
> > Wimbledon is for the hard courters. Just look at the guys who won
> > Wimbledon. They are all good hc players. - Agassi, Sampras, Hewitt,
> > Federer.
>
> Sorry only skimmed your post and thought you were saying there should be =
2
> HC and 2 Clay slams.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

One grass, One hard court, One red clay, One green clay would do. Or
make the 4th one indoor carpet. All 4 slams should be on different
surfaces, 2 of them slow, 2 of them fast.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 13:06:51
From: xamigax@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
On 2 f=E9v, 19:04, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> with one.
>
> It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> as well.

If you want other surface for the AO, why not going back to grass?
This will allow Wimby to retune their own into faster, lower bouncing
grass, if aussies were to go for a "slower grass" (as Wimb as turned
to be).

In other words, what about rooting for traditionnal "old school"
tennis?
Ban anything over 95 Sqare Inches.

That's possibly the only way to prevent more and more bumrooting & 2h-
bh.
The level of the game will suffer, many players will loose a lot...
But once the transition is done, welcome back to more creativity &
angles.
Welcome back to less tall & muscle players, artists a la Mac /
Leconte / Mecir / Arazi / and most (if not all) Indian players style.
Welcome back to the net equilibrists a la Edberg / Rafter.
Tennis needs to take more care (as humans should) of its biodiversity.

The most questioning thing about Lendl is how unfair he is considered
(only because of supposed "political" views), even here.
He was the one who took tennis into the muscle top-fitness / power
groundstrockes business.
Give Lendl credits for most of the way tennis is played today.
Nadal is the true reincarnation of Lendl.
Just as Ivan, he has got into the head of the "top artist" of his era.
Just as Ivan, he plays from the baseline.
Also have a two handed backhand.
Like Ivan, he now has won the Australian.
Like Lendl, he won the French several times.
Unlike Ivan, he has allready won Wimby.
Unlike Ivan he will probably never make height USO finals in a row.

My lord, hope Federer won't quit as MacEnroe did!

Before Ivan, tennis players were often what you call now journeymen.
They enjoyed playing the game... and the parties right after!
Tennis was a sport for the "bons vivants"...
Money damaged the surroundings first: ATP took it way too far into the
"serious" attitudes, blaming players for "abuses", forcing them into
too polished behaviour.
No more jokes with neither the guy on the chair or on the other side
of the net, nor with the crowd.
Money then damaged the players attitudes (not even talking about
juicing), encouraging them into low risk & zero fantasy gamestyle.

I do not want all that old fashioned stuffs "for granted" (settled by
some contract, like on the Legend Tour, with Mensour), I wish players
were not that much under the "polite" politics from the ATP...
It has become way much closer to Disney's dialogues than to real life
ones.

That's also why I liked pretty much both Federer & Djokovic's
reactions about the fact that bookies were making Murray as #1 fav,
and that some "experts" followed the bookies into that non-sense.


Share & Enjoy,
Manolo


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 12:37:00
From: Raja
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
On Feb 2, 1:00=A0pm, "jdeluise" <jdelu...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On =A02-Feb-2009, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> > courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> > with one.
>
> > It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> > will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> > try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> > Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> > as well.
>
> What about Wimbledon in this case?

Wimbledon is for the hard courters. Just look at the guys who won
Wimbledon. They are all good hc players. - Agassi, Sampras, Hewitt,
Federer.



  
Date: 03 Feb 2009 03:32:08
From: TT
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
Raja wrote:
> On Feb 2, 1:00 pm, "jdeluise" <jdelu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2-Feb-2009, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
>>> courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
>>> with one.
>>> It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
>>> will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
>>> try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
>>> Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
>>> as well.
>> What about Wimbledon in this case?
>
> Wimbledon is for the hard courters. Just look at the guys who won
> Wimbledon. They are all good hc players. - Agassi, Sampras, Hewitt,
> Federer.
>

Only exceptions to the rule are Borg and Nadal.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


  
Date: 02 Feb 2009 20:42:03
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?

On 2-Feb-2009, Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com > wrote:

> On Feb 2, 1:00 pm, "jdeluise" <jdelu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On  2-Feb-2009, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> > > courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> > > with one.
> >
> > > It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> > > will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> > > try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> > > Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> > > as well.
> >
> > What about Wimbledon in this case?
>
> Wimbledon is for the hard courters. Just look at the guys who won
> Wimbledon. They are all good hc players. - Agassi, Sampras, Hewitt,
> Federer.

Sorry only skimmed your post and thought you were saying there should be 2
HC and 2 Clay slams.


 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 19:00:56
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?

On 2-Feb-2009, Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com > wrote:

> Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> with one.
>
> It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> as well.

What about Wimbledon in this case?


  
Date: 02 Feb 2009 20:38:26
From: Mark Williams
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?

"jdeluise" <jdeluise@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:3qHhl.41946$AN3.3599@newsfe13.iad...
>
> On 2-Feb-2009, Raja <zepfloyes@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
>> courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
>> with one.
>>
>> It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
>> will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
>> try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
>> Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
>> as well.
>
> What about Wimbledon in this case?

"Grass is for cows"?




 
Date: 02 Feb 2009 10:39:27
From:
Subject: Re: Should AO switch to clay?
On Feb 2, 1:04=A0pm, Raja <zepflo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Green clay or something? I think it is unfair to clay courters. Hard
> courters have 3 slams where they can excel. Clay courters are stuck
> with one.
>
> It should be fair. 2 for clay courters and 2 for hard courters. This
> will also result in hard courters making their games more diverse and
> try to win on clay as well. We might seen Federer, Djokovic, Serena,
> Venus, Sharapova etc change their games to be able to dominate on clay
> as well.

Blimey - the other courts are made slower, and the racket technology
makes it like folks are almost playing on clay anyway. If one can't
serve and volley effectively, something is wrong with the court. A
player should be able to actually put a ball away. How is it unfair to
clay courters that the other court surfaces have moved 25% in their
direction?