tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:45:26
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.

Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.

And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
hours.

Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).

Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
historically rewarded risk taking.

--
Cheers,

vc




 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 09:42:55
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 10:59=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 10:25 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>> On Jan 27, 9:00 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote=
:
> >>>>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>>>>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions.=
I
> >>>>>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some =
curious
> >>>>>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little l=
oose in
> >>>>>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster=
.
> >>>>>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
> >>>>>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Wh=
y you
> >>>>>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never kno=
w.
> >>>>>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
> >>>>>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> >>>>>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT,=
for
> >>>>>> sure. :)
> >>>>> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I ta=
ke
> >>>>> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
> >>>>> complain about?
> >>>> I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same ligh=
t he
> >>>> sees himself. He will never forgive you.
> >>> That made no sense.
> >> Did I say I didn't want to get in the middle? Oops, must have forgotte=
n.
>
> >> I think you took Sakari's "curious remarks about me in the past" [Your
> >> choice of words] to heart. Nothing wrong with it per se. Maybe it is
> >> more cerebral than feeling-related.
>
> >> Maybe you call many others beside Sakari Lund dumb and nutty. I must
> >> have missed it.
>
> > I think I was pretty clear. Either you get it, or you don't. I am not
> > interested in further dramas. Sorry.
>
> Clear in what you stated? Sure. As to why you chose to call Sakari dumb
> and nutty, it really is your business.
>

I think Sakari was trying to wind me up in this thread, and in
addition to some of his curious remarks in the recent past, to me this
means there's a screw a little loose in there. Interpret my remark as
you like. I am not going to get into a discussion about this.


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 08:38:45
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 10:25=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 9:00 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >>>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some cu=
rious
> >>>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loo=
se in
> >>>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
> >>>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
> >>>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why =
you
> >>>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
> >>>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
> >>>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> >>>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, f=
or
> >>>> sure. :)
> >>> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
> >>> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
> >>> complain about?
> >> I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light =
he
> >> sees himself. He will never forgive you.
>
> > That made no sense.
>
> Did I say I didn't want to get in the middle? Oops, must have forgotten.
>
> I think you took Sakari's "curious remarks about me in the past" [Your
> choice of words] to heart. Nothing wrong with it per se. Maybe it is
> more cerebral than feeling-related.
>
> Maybe you call many others beside Sakari Lund dumb and nutty. I must
> have missed it.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc

I think I was pretty clear. Either you get it, or you don't. I am not
interested in further dramas. Sorry.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 16:59:58
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 27, 10:25 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>> On Jan 27, 9:00 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>>>>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>>>>>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>>>>>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>>>>>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>>>>>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)
>>>>>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
>>>>>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>>>>>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>>>>>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
>>>>>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
>>>>>> sure. :)
>>>>> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
>>>>> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
>>>>> complain about?
>>>> I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light he
>>>> sees himself. He will never forgive you.
>>> That made no sense.
>> Did I say I didn't want to get in the middle? Oops, must have forgotten.
>>
>> I think you took Sakari's "curious remarks about me in the past" [Your
>> choice of words] to heart. Nothing wrong with it per se. Maybe it is
>> more cerebral than feeling-related.
>>
>> Maybe you call many others beside Sakari Lund dumb and nutty. I must
>> have missed it.
>>
>
> I think I was pretty clear. Either you get it, or you don't. I am not
> interested in further dramas. Sorry.

Clear in what you stated? Sure. As to why you chose to call Sakari dumb
and nutty, it really is your business.

I too am not very interested in this almost-drama. Sakari Lund's non
sequitur one liner about me and Nadal should have been the last post on
this subthread. At least, it was funny and pithy.

<<shrug >>

--
Cheers,

vc


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 08:16:33
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 9:00=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> Sakari Lund wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> > <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curi=
ous
> >>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose=
in
> >>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
> >>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
> >>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why yo=
u
> >>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>
> >>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>
> >> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> >> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
> >> sure. :)
>
> > Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
> > it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
> > complain about?
>
> I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light he
> sees himself. He will never forgive you.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc

That made no sense.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 16:25:09
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 27, 9:00 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>>>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>>>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>>>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>>>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)
>>>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
>>>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>>>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>>>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
>>>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
>>>> sure. :)
>>> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
>>> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
>>> complain about?
>> I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light he
>> sees himself. He will never forgive you.
>>
>
> That made no sense.

Did I say I didn't want to get in the middle? Oops, must have forgotten.

I think you took Sakari's "curious remarks about me in the past" [Your
choice of words] to heart. Nothing wrong with it per se. Maybe it is
more cerebral than feeling-related.

Maybe you call many others beside Sakari Lund dumb and nutty. I must
have missed it.

--
Cheers,

vc


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 06:51:21
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 8:13=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>
>
>
> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 27, 1:31=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >> > <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >> >> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curi=
ous
> >> >> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose=
in
> >> >> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>
> >> > That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
>
> >> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
> >> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>
> >> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>
> >> --
> >> Cheers,
>
> >> vc
>
> >Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> >personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
> >sure. :)
>
> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
> complain about?

Grow up.


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 01:12:06
From: topspin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 Jan, 18:30, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
Not to mention Roger-Rafa on HC
> for the first time in a slam ever... talk about bragging rights...
>
> P

Now that one would be worth paying a lot to see. I want it to be
sooner rather than later, given the age gap between them.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:33:00
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 4:46=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 5:29=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > > On Jan 27, 2:40 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Jan 26, 12:36 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> On Jan 26, 10:33 pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
> > >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:45 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrot=
e:
> > >>>>>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners an=
d is
> > >>>>>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
> > >>>>>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
> > >>>>>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at th=
e end of
> > >>>>>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match bare=
ly hit 2
> > >>>>>> hours.
> > >>>>>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushi=
ng)
> > >>>>>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statement=
s from
> > >>>>>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
> > >>>>>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effectiv=
e tennis
> > >>>>>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which ha=
ve
> > >>>>>> historically rewarded risk taking.
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>> vc
> > >>>>> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > >>>>> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky featur=
es of
> > >>>>> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on =
its
> > >>>>> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
> > >>>>> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. =
He
> > >>>>> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > >>>>> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand si=
de.
> > >>>>> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, sin=
ce he
> > >>>>> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any othe=
r
> > >>>>> pro,
> > >>>> I know you're using hyperbole here,
> > >>> How about "leagues ahead"?
> > >>>> but do you really think Nadal
> > >>>> covers the court any better than
> > >>>> Monfils does?
> > >>> It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
> > >>> what has Nadal?
> > >> That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the cour=
t
> > >> better than anyone, which I think
> > >> is debatable.
>
> > > I think Nadal is the best in this category. And he is certainly the
> > > most confident player about his movement and coverage capacity. The
> > > kind of risks he takes, relying on his wheels to back him up, is far
> > > greater than anything Monfils does, imo.
>
> > Nadal's off balance shots when he is running like the wind are
> > phenomenal. And he also turns on a dime.
>
> > He may not look pretty doing it, but he is amazing. And the forehands h=
e
> > hits off balls that are close to the ground is impossible given his gri=
p.
>
> Good point, conventional thinking says use slice and keep the ball low
> against guys with extreme grips.
> But Nadal murders the slice. I think you've got to hit through the
> court with flattish shots to take out Nadal.

The way Nadal can bend his knees, lean back, get the racket down to
the required level (sometimes barely a foot off the ground) and then
execute the forehand shot with perfect balance is phenomenal to watch.
It's highly unorthodox and requires extraordinary fitness. Like I
said, Nadal turns most of the conventional tennis on its head and
plays in his own super-athletic way.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 04:34:45
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:33:00 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
<arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote:

>On Jan 27, 4:46 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 5:29 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>> > > On Jan 27, 2:40 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> On Jan 26, 12:36 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >>> On Jan 26, 10:33 pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:45 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> > >>>>>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
>> > >>>>>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>> > >>>>>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>> > >>>>>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
>> > >>>>>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
>> > >>>>>> hours.
>> > >>>>>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
>> > >>>>>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
>> > >>>>>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>> > >>>>>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
>> > >>>>>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
>> > >>>>>> historically rewarded risk taking.
>> > >>>>>> --
>> > >>>>>> Cheers,
>> > >>>>>> vc
>> > >>>>> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
>> > >>>>> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
>> > >>>>> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
>> > >>>>> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>> > >>>>> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
>> > >>>>> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
>> > >>>>> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
>> > >>>>> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
>> > >>>>> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
>> > >>>>> pro,
>> > >>>> I know you're using hyperbole here,
>> > >>> How about "leagues ahead"?
>> > >>>> but do you really think Nadal
>> > >>>> covers the court any better than
>> > >>>> Monfils does?
>> > >>> It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
>> > >>> what has Nadal?
>> > >> That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the court
>> > >> better than anyone, which I think
>> > >> is debatable.
>>
>> > > I think Nadal is the best in this category. And he is certainly the
>> > > most confident player about his movement and coverage capacity. The
>> > > kind of risks he takes, relying on his wheels to back him up, is far
>> > > greater than anything Monfils does, imo.
>>
>> > Nadal's off balance shots when he is running like the wind are
>> > phenomenal. And he also turns on a dime.
>>
>> > He may not look pretty doing it, but he is amazing. And the forehands he
>> > hits off balls that are close to the ground is impossible given his grip.
>>
>> Good point, conventional thinking says use slice and keep the ball low
>> against guys with extreme grips.
>> But Nadal murders the slice. I think you've got to hit through the
>> court with flattish shots to take out Nadal.
>
>The way Nadal can bend his knees, lean back, get the racket down to
>the required level (sometimes barely a foot off the ground) and then
>execute the forehand shot with perfect balance is phenomenal to watch.
>It's highly unorthodox and requires extraordinary fitness. Like I
>said, Nadal turns most of the conventional tennis on its head and
>plays in his own super-athletic way.

that is what cockaroaches do.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:24:51
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 4:37=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curio=
us
> >>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose =
in
> >>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
> >>> That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
> >> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
> >> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>
> >> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>
> > Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> > personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
> > sure. :)
>
> I am not getting in the middle of your (impersonal?) feud with Sakari Lun=
d.
>

There's no "feud". Sakari sometimes try to wind up people to see how
they react. On the trollometer it barely registers.

> I took no issue with his funny comment about my Nadal posts.
>

Sure.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 14:46:20
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 5:29=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 2:40 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 26, 12:36 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 26, 10:33 pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:45 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>>>>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and =
is
> >>>>>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
> >>>>>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
> >>>>>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the =
end of
> >>>>>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely=
hit 2
> >>>>>> hours.
> >>>>>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing=
)
> >>>>>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements =
from
> >>>>>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
> >>>>>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective =
tennis
> >>>>>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> >>>>>> historically rewarded risk taking.
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> vc
> >>>>> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> >>>>> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features=
of
> >>>>> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on it=
s
> >>>>> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
> >>>>> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> >>>>> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> >>>>> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side=
.
> >>>>> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since=
he
> >>>>> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> >>>>> pro,
> >>>> I know you're using hyperbole here,
> >>> How about "leagues ahead"?
> >>>> but do you really think Nadal
> >>>> covers the court any better than
> >>>> Monfils does?
> >>> It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
> >>> what has Nadal?
> >> That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the court
> >> better than anyone, which I think
> >> is debatable.
>
> > I think Nadal is the best in this category. And he is certainly the
> > most confident player about his movement and coverage capacity. The
> > kind of risks he takes, relying on his wheels to back him up, is far
> > greater than anything Monfils does, imo.
>
> Nadal's off balance shots when he is running like the wind are
> phenomenal. And he also turns on a dime.
>
> He may not look pretty doing it, but he is amazing. And the forehands he
> hits off balls that are close to the ground is impossible given his grip.

Good point, conventional thinking says use slice and keep the ball low
against guys with extreme grips.
But Nadal murders the slice. I think you've got to hit through the
court with flattish shots to take out Nadal.



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 14:32:46
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 4:20=A0pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 4:00=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 26 Jan, 20:44, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 26, 12:11=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and=
is
> > > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the=
end of
> > > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barel=
y hit 2
> > > > > hours.
>
> > > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushin=
g)
> > > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements=
from
> > > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective=
tennis
> > > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which hav=
e
> > > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > > vc
>
> > > > Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round her=
e.
> > > > Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse,=
yes;
> > > > obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> > > > ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> > > > candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for=
a
> > > > leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, an=
d
>
> > > > For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, s=
o
> > > > the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> > > > smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> > > > the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> > > I don't understand how Fed getting his 14th slam will end the
> > > *fiction* that slam count alone decides
> > > the greatest.
>
> > > If Fed breaks Pete's mark, he will be considered the greatest largely
> > > because he has the most Slams. Whether
> > > that's fair or not is another story.
>
> > Considered by whom?
>
> > I am hoping, and guessing, that two players so close together getting
> > the same slam total will generate discussion and argument. Some of it
> > will be well founded (how do you compare two players, how do you
> > evaluate success at different venues, against different competitors,
> > in different eras, etc). Some of it will be fanboy mud-slinging, with
> > extra zing because the players are so close in time.
>
> > Either way will do for me if it muddies (as I believe it will) =A0the
> > easy, sloppy-thinking, belief that 14 (or 15, or more) =3D best.
>
> > Just a personal preference....
>
> > :-)-
>
> Well, I agree it's nearly impossible to compare the achievements of
> players of different eras because, unfortunately, tennis has had such
> a convoluted history, what with the pro-amateur split. If only it
> could have been like golf, tennis' history would be a lot *cleaner*
> imo. :)

Major organizational changes always result in disruption of a sport's
history and records. After such an event, there is usually no good way
to recognize past achievments in the same manner as contemporary ones,
so eventually people stop trying. The difficult point is *when* they
stop trying -- typically it's not until the sport has amassed a
considerable amount of history under the new regime.

Such changes have occurred in many sports (I alluded to the "Wee
Willie Keeler" example in U.S. baseball in a post here within the last
several months), but probably the best illustration is American
football, especially because its restructuring occurred at almost
exactly the same time as the dawn of the open era in tennis. Up until
the mid-1960s, there was only a single professional football league
that really mattered: the NFL. Previous competitors (such as Otto
Graham's AAFC) had been forgotten or absorbed. Thus, the "greatest
teams ever" were those with the most NFL championships. Simple.

After the upstart American Football League became more successful than
expected, the leaders of the NFL and AFL decided to match their
champions in a season-ending "Super Bowl." This game was an immediate
hit, and when the AFL won the third one in 1969, thus legitimizing
itself, the two leagues merged. The Super Bowl continued, now as a
championship game between two conferences within the NFL. At this
point, greatness began to be measured by the number of Super Bowls a
team had won (or appeared in). For a while, I think there was a
transitional period in which fans attempted to combine Super Bowls
with pre-Super Bowl NFL titles to get a single figure for total
championships. That period more or less ended after enough Super Bowls
had been played to make a Super Bowl-only measurement worthwhile.
Today, greatness and team stature in common parlance are defined by
most fans almost exclusively in terms of Super Bowls. Pre-1967 NFL
championships have not been forgotten entirely, but they have been
seriously devalued in memory. It's simply more convenient, and in a
real sense more meaningful, simply to do a straight Super Bowls to
Super Bowls comparison.

Joe Ramirez


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 06:49:16
From:
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
In article
<4ad50256-4c9c-478d-ab1d-2e7491e67821@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com >,
josephmramirez@netzero.com (Joe Ramirez) wrote:

>
> Major organizational changes always result in disruption of a
> sport's
> history and records. After such an event, there is usually no good
> way
> to recognize past achievments in the same manner as contemporary
> ones,
> so eventually people stop trying. The difficult point is *when* they
> stop trying -- typically it's not until the sport has amassed a
> considerable amount of history under the new regime.

The football stuff is interesting. The problem, though, is that in tennis
what's happened isn't so much an organizational restructuring with a
specific date but a gradual change in values. The players of the 1970s and
on into the 1980s cared about longevity and winning as much as they could
because no one tournament paid all that well. Endorsement money was also
less, but you got it by winning events and rising in the rankings. Being
#1 was a very big deal, whenever it happened.

As the GSs began sweetening their pots and going all out to make
themselves the premier events and it became possible to set yourself up
for life by winning just one of them, the emphasis changed to winning
Slams.

And marketing came in. So endorsement money now is more concentrated on
fewer players, and those tend to be either the Slam winners or the cute
and marketable (like Kournikova). Plus, the top players in a given country
probably have national endorsements, too. No one before Sampras thought
the YE#1 was more valuable than being #1 any other time of year; but the
idea of structuring the tour around a "race" had been floating around
before the ATP tour reorganized itself that way (Navratilova said
something very like it as a suggestion for restructuring the women's tour
a year or two earlier; I doubt she thought of it all by herself).

The design of the rankings systems reflects these changing values - and
players play to the ranking system because they *do* all want to be #1.
The gradual shift in playing surfaces has been a big element, too, in
determining how players train and where and for what type of game. (It's
why all the interesting players have trained in Europe because they still
train on clay there.)

I think the real problem with the discussions here is that people insist
on applying the values of one era to the players of another. *Of course*
Lendl and Connors would have behaved differently if Slams had been the
focus then that they are now. *Of course* Federer would still be trying
hard to rack up the smaller titles if the Slams still had winners' checks
of $100,000 instead of $1.5 million. *Of course* no one would debate the
value of Laver's first CYGS if there hadn't been a split between amateurs
and pros back then and if he'd played on the same surfaces we have now.

I agree: sports disrupt their own history when they change their
infrastructure too much. Tennis, in my view, has been particularly stupid
in this regard. There's barely a year goes by that the sport doesn't
fiddle with the rankings system. And in the last year it's dumped off the
calendar events that are older than the tours themselves. It is incredibly
stupid - and there's nothing fans can do.

And here's another question: isn't it more of an achievement now to win
the AO because of the extreme heat, which wasn't around to the same extent
in Laver's day? Even when it was really hot then, the tournament was
played on grass, which didn't reflect the heat back the way the hard
courts do.

wg



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 14:07:36
From: topspin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 Jan, 21:30, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:

> Well, I think we can safely take the time period starting from 1989,
> when AO changed to hardcourt for good and soonafter which ATP was
> established. Before that it's hazy.

I have no problems with a discussion about 'greatest since 1989'.
Mentally I have always said to myself 'when they talk about GOAT they
are really talking about greatest since 1990'. I think it is a
reasonable time horizon because tennis has been reasonably constant
over that period, certainly in terms of which titles are seen as most
significant.

It is just that when you have watched for as long as I have, 1989
seems not that long ago, and certainly way short of All Time!!


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 1:31=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> Sakari Lund wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> > <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
> >> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
> >> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>
> > That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
>
> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>
> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc

Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
sure. :)


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 16:13:01
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
<arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote:

>On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>> > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>> > <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>> >> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>> >> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>> >> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>>
>> > That was like Vari praising Nadal  :-)
>>
>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>>
>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> vc
>
>Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
>personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
>sure. :)

Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
complain about?


   
Date: 27 Jan 2009 15:00:11
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)
>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>>>
>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>>>
>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
>> sure. :)
>
> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
> complain about?

I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light he
sees himself. He will never forgive you.

--
Cheers,

vc


    
Date: 27 Jan 2009 17:56:50
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:00:11 GMT, "Vari L. Cinicke"
<cinicke@netscape.net > wrote:

>Sakari Lund wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>> <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)
>>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
>>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>>>>
>>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>>>>
>>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
>>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
>>> sure. :)
>>
>> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
>> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
>> complain about?
>
>I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light he
>sees himself. He will never forgive you.

Gotta say I don't understand arnab's last two posts at all. I must be
missing something here.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 22:37:50
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)
>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>>
>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>>
>
> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, for
> sure. :)

I am not getting in the middle of your (impersonal?) feud with Sakari Lund.

I took no issue with his funny comment about my Nadal posts.

--
Cheers,

vc


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 13:58:08
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 3:49=A0am, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > I kind of know the feeling. In high school, I was the perennial top
> > kid in my class, way ahead of my peers and so I used to note the exact
> > result of the top kid of my senior class and then try to beat that
> > benchmark when my time came, as if I was trying to set an all-time
> > record for each grade or something like that. It can be a very
> > interesting feeling.
>
> You're even starting to talk like Federer now ... :-)

I have always been this way. Right from the very beginning. Federer
happens to have a similar mindset in the area of tennis. Used to like
Sampras very much as well for a similar "driven" attitude. :)

Of course, once you are out of high school, things are not that clear
cut any more. In fact, in terms of goal setting, playing tennis as a
top player and earning money is a lot easier than holding a regular
professional job, because in tennis there are clear, universally
acknowledged and valued goals that you can go after.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 13:49:00
From:
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?

> I kind of know the feeling. In high school, I was the perennial top
> kid in my class, way ahead of my peers and so I used to note the exact
> result of the top kid of my senior class and then try to beat that
> benchmark when my time came, as if I was trying to set an all-time
> record for each grade or something like that. It can be a very
> interesting feeling.

You're even starting to talk like Federer now ... :-)



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 13:30:48
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 3:20=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 4:00=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 26 Jan, 20:44, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 26, 12:11=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and=
is
> > > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the=
end of
> > > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barel=
y hit 2
> > > > > hours.
>
> > > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushin=
g)
> > > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements=
from
> > > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective=
tennis
> > > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which hav=
e
> > > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > > vc
>
> > > > Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round her=
e.
> > > > Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse,=
yes;
> > > > obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> > > > ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> > > > candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for=
a
> > > > leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, an=
d
>
> > > > For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, s=
o
> > > > the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> > > > smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> > > > the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> > > I don't understand how Fed getting his 14th slam will end the
> > > *fiction* that slam count alone decides
> > > the greatest.
>
> > > If Fed breaks Pete's mark, he will be considered the greatest largely
> > > because he has the most Slams. Whether
> > > that's fair or not is another story.
>
> > Considered by whom?
>
> > I am hoping, and guessing, that two players so close together getting
> > the same slam total will generate discussion and argument. Some of it
> > will be well founded (how do you compare two players, how do you
> > evaluate success at different venues, against different competitors,
> > in different eras, etc). Some of it will be fanboy mud-slinging, with
> > extra zing because the players are so close in time.
>
> > Either way will do for me if it muddies (as I believe it will) =A0the
> > easy, sloppy-thinking, belief that 14 (or 15, or more) =3D best.
>
> > Just a personal preference....
>
> > :-)-
>
> Well, I agree it's nearly impossible to compare the achievements of
> players of different eras because, unfortunately, tennis has had such
> a convoluted history, what with the pro-amateur split. If only it
> could have been like golf, tennis' history would be a lot *cleaner*
> imo. :)
>
> I just think beginning in the 80s with Becker and Edberg's generation
> tennis has had a nice system going for it - four Slams that everyone
> can play and nearly always chooses to play. Whoever wins the most
> seems to me to have more than a valid claim of being the *greatest*. O
> at least greatest since 1985? Of course, no will agree on that either,
> but what can you do?

Well, I think we can safely take the time period starting from 1989,
when AO changed to hardcourt for good and soonafter which ATP was
established. Before that it's hazy.

From 1989 onwards, Pete stands out as a clear winner in terms of
greatest player, although the lack of a French Open will always be a
hole in the resume. But Federer is almost sure to pass him in the most
important categories, and I think Federer specifically targeted
Sampras's records.

I kind of know the feeling. In high school, I was the perennial top
kid in my class, way ahead of my peers and so I used to note the exact
result of the top kid of my senior class and then try to beat that
benchmark when my time came, as if I was trying to set an all-time
record for each grade or something like that. It can be a very
interesting feeling.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 23:05:21
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 27, 3:20 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I think we can safely take the time period starting from 1989,
> when AO changed to hardcourt for good and soonafter which ATP was
> established. Before that it's hazy.
>
> From 1989 onwards, Pete stands out as a clear winner in terms of
> greatest player, although the lack of a French Open will always be a
> hole in the resume. But Federer is almost sure to pass him in the most
> important categories, and I think Federer specifically targeted
> Sampras's records.
>
> I kind of know the feeling. In high school, I was the perennial top
> kid in my class, way ahead of my peers and so I used to note the exact
> result of the top kid of my senior class and then try to beat that
> benchmark when my time came, as if I was trying to set an all-time
> record for each grade or something like that. It can be a very
> interesting feeling.



In a similar vein my daughter just found out she got a scholarship to
study Law at university - looks like genius is hereditary no?


   
Date: 27 Jan 2009 12:16:10
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:05:21 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>> On Jan 27, 3:20 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, I think we can safely take the time period starting from 1989,
>> when AO changed to hardcourt for good and soonafter which ATP was
>> established. Before that it's hazy.
>>
>> From 1989 onwards, Pete stands out as a clear winner in terms of
>> greatest player, although the lack of a French Open will always be a
>> hole in the resume. But Federer is almost sure to pass him in the most
>> important categories, and I think Federer specifically targeted
>> Sampras's records.
>>
>> I kind of know the feeling. In high school, I was the perennial top
>> kid in my class, way ahead of my peers and so I used to note the exact
>> result of the top kid of my senior class and then try to beat that
>> benchmark when my time came, as if I was trying to set an all-time
>> record for each grade or something like that. It can be a very
>> interesting feeling.
>
>
>
>In a similar vein my daughter just found out she got a scholarship to
>study Law at university - looks like genius is hereditary no?


in the sense that all lawyers do is prey on the misery of others, yes.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 13:20:36
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 4:00=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 26 Jan, 20:44, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 12:11=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and i=
s
> > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the e=
nd of
> > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely =
hit 2
> > > > hours.
>
> > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements f=
rom
> > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective t=
ennis
> > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > vc
>
> > > Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
> > > Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, y=
es;
> > > obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> > > ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> > > candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
> > > leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>
> > > For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
> > > the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> > > smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> > > the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> > I don't understand how Fed getting his 14th slam will end the
> > *fiction* that slam count alone decides
> > the greatest.
>
> > If Fed breaks Pete's mark, he will be considered the greatest largely
> > because he has the most Slams. Whether
> > that's fair or not is another story.
>
> Considered by whom?
>
> I am hoping, and guessing, that two players so close together getting
> the same slam total will generate discussion and argument. Some of it
> will be well founded (how do you compare two players, how do you
> evaluate success at different venues, against different competitors,
> in different eras, etc). Some of it will be fanboy mud-slinging, with
> extra zing because the players are so close in time.
>
> Either way will do for me if it muddies (as I believe it will) =A0the
> easy, sloppy-thinking, belief that 14 (or 15, or more) =3D best.
>
> Just a personal preference....
>
> :-)-

Well, I agree it's nearly impossible to compare the achievements of
players of different eras because, unfortunately, tennis has had such
a convoluted history, what with the pro-amateur split. If only it
could have been like golf, tennis' history would be a lot *cleaner*
imo. :)

I just think beginning in the 80s with Becker and Edberg's generation
tennis has had a nice system going for it - four Slams that everyone
can play and nearly always chooses to play. Whoever wins the most
seems to me to have more than a valid claim of being the *greatest*. O
at least greatest since 1985? Of course, no will agree on that either,
but what can you do?


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 13:16:50
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 2:40=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 12:36=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 10:33=A0pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrot=
e:
>
> > > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and=
is
> > > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the=
end of
> > > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barel=
y hit 2
> > > > > hours.
>
> > > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushin=
g)
> > > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements=
from
> > > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective=
tennis
> > > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which hav=
e
> > > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > > vc
>
> > > > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > > > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features=
of
> > > > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on it=
s
> > > > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > > > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > > > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > > > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side=
.
> > > > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since=
he
> > > > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > > > pro,
>
> > > I know you're using hyperbole here,
>
> > How about "leagues ahead"?
>
> > > but do you really think Nadal
> > > covers the court any better than
> > > Monfils does?
>
> > It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
> > what has Nadal?
>
> That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the court
> better than anyone, which I think
> is debatable.

I think Nadal is the best in this category. And he is certainly the
most confident player about his movement and coverage capacity. The
kind of risks he takes, relying on his wheels to back him up, is far
greater than anything Monfils does, imo.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 22:29:10
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2:40 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 12:36 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 26, 10:33 pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:45 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
>>>>>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>>>>>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>>>>>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
>>>>>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
>>>>>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
>>>>>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>>>>>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
>>>>>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
>>>>>> historically rewarded risk taking.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> vc
>>>>> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
>>>>> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
>>>>> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
>>>>> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>>>>> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
>>>>> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
>>>>> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
>>>>> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
>>>>> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
>>>>> pro,
>>>> I know you're using hyperbole here,
>>> How about "leagues ahead"?
>>>> but do you really think Nadal
>>>> covers the court any better than
>>>> Monfils does?
>>> It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
>>> what has Nadal?
>> That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the court
>> better than anyone, which I think
>> is debatable.
>
> I think Nadal is the best in this category. And he is certainly the
> most confident player about his movement and coverage capacity. The
> kind of risks he takes, relying on his wheels to back him up, is far
> greater than anything Monfils does, imo.

Nadal's off balance shots when he is running like the wind are
phenomenal. And he also turns on a dime.

He may not look pretty doing it, but he is amazing. And the forehands he
hits off balls that are close to the ground is impossible given his grip.

His superior movement + shot making on the run combo is what allows
Nadal to avoid risk even when he is camped in his backhand alley hitting
forehands.

--
Cheers,

vc


   
Date: 27 Jan 2009 23:12:12
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Vari L. Cinicke wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>> On Jan 27, 2:40 am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 12:36 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jan 26, 10:33 pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:45 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
>>>>>>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>>>>>>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>>>>>>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the
>>>>>>> end of
>>>>>>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match
>>>>>>> barely hit 2
>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
>>>>>>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements
>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>>>>>>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective
>>>>>>> tennis
>>>>>>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
>>>>>>> historically rewarded risk taking.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> vc
>>>>>> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
>>>>>> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky
>>>>>> features of
>>>>>> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
>>>>>> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>>>>>> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
>>>>>> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
>>>>>> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
>>>>>> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast,
>>>>>> since he
>>>>>> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
>>>>>> pro,
>>>>> I know you're using hyperbole here,
>>>> How about "leagues ahead"?
>>>>> but do you really think Nadal
>>>>> covers the court any better than
>>>>> Monfils does?
>>>> It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
>>>> what has Nadal?
>>> That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the court
>>> better than anyone, which I think
>>> is debatable.
>>
>> I think Nadal is the best in this category. And he is certainly the
>> most confident player about his movement and coverage capacity. The
>> kind of risks he takes, relying on his wheels to back him up, is far
>> greater than anything Monfils does, imo.
>
> Nadal's off balance shots when he is running like the wind are
> phenomenal. And he also turns on a dime.
>
> He may not look pretty doing it, but he is amazing. And the forehands he
> hits off balls that are close to the ground is impossible given his grip.
>
> His superior movement + shot making on the run combo is what allows
> Nadal to avoid risk even when he is camped in his backhand alley hitting
> forehands.
>


Translation : "Rafa is fucking great, but I don't want to say it as I'm
a die hard Fedfucking baboon."




 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 13:00:30
From: topspin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 Jan, 20:44, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 12:11=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end=
of
> > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hi=
t 2
> > > hours.
>
> > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements fro=
m
> > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective ten=
nis
> > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
>
> > > vc
>
> > Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
> > Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, yes=
;
> > obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> > ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> > candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
> > leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>
> > For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
> > the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> > smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> > the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> I don't understand how Fed getting his 14th slam will end the
> *fiction* that slam count alone decides
> the greatest.
>
> If Fed breaks Pete's mark, he will be considered the greatest largely
> because he has the most Slams. Whether
> that's fair or not is another story.

Considered by whom?

I am hoping, and guessing, that two players so close together getting
the same slam total will generate discussion and argument. Some of it
will be well founded (how do you compare two players, how do you
evaluate success at different venues, against different competitors,
in different eras, etc). Some of it will be fanboy mud-slinging, with
extra zing because the players are so close in time.

Either way will do for me if it muddies (as I believe it will) the
easy, sloppy-thinking, belief that 14 (or 15, or more) =3D best.

Just a personal preference....

:-)


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 14:55:59
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
topspin wrote:
> On 26 Jan, 20:44, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 12:11 pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
>>>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>>>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>>>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
>>>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
>>>> hours.
>>>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
>>>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
>>>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>>>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
>>>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
>>>> historically rewarded risk taking.
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> vc
>>> Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
>>> Lots of - fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, yes;
>>> obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
>>> ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
>>> candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
>>> leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>>> For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
>>> the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
>>> smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
>>> the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>> I don't understand how Fed getting his 14th slam will end the
>> *fiction* that slam count alone decides
>> the greatest.
>>
>> If Fed breaks Pete's mark, he will be considered the greatest largely
>> because he has the most Slams. Whether
>> that's fair or not is another story.
>
> Considered by whom?
>
> I am hoping, and guessing, that two players so close together getting
> the same slam total will generate discussion and argument. Some of it
> will be well founded (how do you compare two players, how do you
> evaluate success at different venues, against different competitors,
> in different eras, etc). Some of it will be fanboy mud-slinging, with
> extra zing because the players are so close in time.
>
> Either way will do for me if it muddies (as I believe it will) the
> easy, sloppy-thinking, belief that 14 (or 15, or more) = best.
>
> Just a personal preference....
>
> :-)



You're too dumb to realize it's not about 'being the best' in some
nebulous fashion, rather winning the most silverware.



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 12:44:23
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 12:11=A0pm, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end o=
f
> > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit =
2
> > hours.
>
> > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tenni=
s
> > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > --
> > Cheers,
>
> > vc
>
> Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
> Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, yes;
> obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
> leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>
> For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
> the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]

I don't understand how Fed getting his 14th slam will end the
*fiction* that slam count alone decides
the greatest.

If Fed breaks Pete's mark, he will be considered the greatest largely
because he has the most Slams. Whether
that's fair or not is another story.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 12:40:18
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 12:36=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 10:33=A0pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and i=
s
> > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the e=
nd of
> > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely =
hit 2
> > > > hours.
>
> > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements f=
rom
> > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective t=
ennis
> > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > vc
>
> > > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features o=
f
> > > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> > > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> > > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since h=
e
> > > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > > pro,
>
> > I know you're using hyperbole here,
>
> How about "leagues ahead"?
>
> > but do you really think Nadal
> > covers the court any better than
> > Monfils does?
>
> It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
> what has Nadal?

That wasn't what I was responding to. You said he can cover the court
better than anyone, which I think
is debatable.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 12:39:05
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 1:21=A0pm, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 8:33=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and i=
s
> > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the e=
nd of
> > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely =
hit 2
> > > > hours.
>
> > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements f=
rom
> > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective t=
ennis
> > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > vc
>
> > > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features o=
f
> > > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> > > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> > > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since h=
e
> > > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > > pro,
>
> > I know you're using hyperbole here, but do you really think Nadal
> > covers the court any better than
> > Monfils does? I'm thinking Monfils might be one of the top 2 or 3 pure
> > athletes I've ever seen on a tennis court.
>
> ++ Nadal can get to even the best drop shots and as he's charging 8
> times out of 10 (say) actually hit a shot that puts the OTHER GUY in
> trouble/have to scramble... it's amazing... it all but stopped Feds
> from dropping Nadal :)
>
> Side to side and to net combined Nadal covers amazingly... BUT YES
> some of Monfils wide out coverages are OUTRAGEOUS! BUT when he gets to
> them he doesn't have the body control to hit shots like Nadal does...
> Monfils is sliding into them meaning he's a half step slower than
> Nadal who often gets there on the run... maybe Nadal just explodes
> first step faster but Monfils in a 200meters would wipe Nadal...
> probably... Nadal has sprinter like explosivity...
>
> P- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Monfils has a quick first step but he also seems to have some hidden
jet pack that he can turn on when he really wants to get to a ball
that makes his coverage possibly even better than Nadal's. Obviously,
like Arnab says, what he does with the shot once he gets there is
another story and no doubt Nadal can do more and make fewer errors
when on the dead run.


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 06:41:59
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Vari L. Cinicke wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.
>


Seems you don't understand what 'risk taking' is - too bad there is no
cure for dumbness.



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 11:29:13
From: arahim
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 7:45=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.
>

Umm ... He has taken over the odds so it seems at least the bettors
are giving him respect with their money and by quite a bit. He is
almost an even bet while Federer only rates a third of a chance.

R Nadal 6/5
R Federer 2/1
N Djokovic 6/1
J-W Tsonga 8/1
J M del Potro 16/1
F Verdasco 33/1
A Roddick 33/1
G Simon 40/1

Part of this has to do with the path to the final which got a little
bit clearer for Nadal.
Federer has had to go through Safin (the old champion) and Berdych in
the early rounds which for the early rounds are tough matchups. Has
the new age player in the QFs and if he wins then a possible matchup
with the current champion and then possibly against the number one or
last year's finalist. Even though the pre-tournament favorite is out
that is a pretty good line up to get through if he does and should put
the new age, old age players discussion in perspective. If not I
suppose it will rage on until Wimbledon at least:)

> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 11:18:24
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 11:07=A0am, Joe Ramirez <josephmrami...@netzero.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 1:30=A0pm, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 9:11=A0am, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and i=
s
> > > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the e=
nd of
> > > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely =
hit 2
> > > > hours.
>
> > > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements f=
rom
> > > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective t=
ennis
> > > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > vc
>
> > > Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
> > > Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, y=
es;
> > > obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> > > ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> > > candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
> > > leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>
> > > For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
> > > the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> > > smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> > > the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> > > Personally I find Nadal impressive and rather thrilling to watch. He
> > > was playing a rather weary Gonzalez today, but the men's competition
> > > is boiling up nicely and looks as competitive a quarter final line up
> > > as any slam of recent memory (top 7 seeds still in in the men's).
> > > Unless there are injuries, the winner will have earned their title.
>
> > ++ RIGHT... great tournament... and I agree with whomever said that
> > there are some twists to come... the tournament going almost to
> > ranking so far - out side of Murray - might hold BUT Murray's exit
> > might be the start of the upsets coming in the SECOND week as opposed
> > to the first... I can see Simon beating Nadal but aside from that
> > upset Nadal gets to the finals... I don't think Tsonga is playing well
> > enough to unglue Rafa... they would be playing at night and Tsonga
> > won't melt... of course Tsonga's Verdasco match might be rough on
> > JWT... Simon-Tsonga is not out of the question... and does Djokovic
> > have the gear to get to Federer again... on any given night who knows?
> > OR RODDICK taking out Djokovic... would that give Fed a finals
> > birth??? Fed-Simon would be anti-climatic for sure... Fed-Tsonga or
> > Djokovic-Tsonga would be a MASH FEST! Not to mention Roger-Rafa on HC
> > for the first time in a slam ever... talk about bragging rights...
>
> The only thing certain is that the men's tournament is moving
> inexorably toward the Verdasco-Del Potro final for which David W. has
> been beseeching the tennis gods. :)
>
> Joe Ramirez

++ Still think either Rafa or Roger will NOT make finals... I have to
see it to believe it on HC... though... both certainly could do it...
Verdasco-Roddick final :))

P



 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 11:07:57
From: Joe Ramirez
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 1:30=A0pm, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 9:11=A0am, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end=
of
> > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hi=
t 2
> > > hours.
>
> > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements fro=
m
> > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective ten=
nis
> > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
>
> > > vc
>
> > Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
> > Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, yes=
;
> > obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> > ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> > candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
> > leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>
> > For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
> > the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> > smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> > the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> > Personally I find Nadal impressive and rather thrilling to watch. He
> > was playing a rather weary Gonzalez today, but the men's competition
> > is boiling up nicely and looks as competitive a quarter final line up
> > as any slam of recent memory (top 7 seeds still in in the men's).
> > Unless there are injuries, the winner will have earned their title.
>
> ++ RIGHT... great tournament... and I agree with whomever said that
> there are some twists to come... the tournament going almost to
> ranking so far - out side of Murray - might hold BUT Murray's exit
> might be the start of the upsets coming in the SECOND week as opposed
> to the first... I can see Simon beating Nadal but aside from that
> upset Nadal gets to the finals... I don't think Tsonga is playing well
> enough to unglue Rafa... they would be playing at night and Tsonga
> won't melt... of course Tsonga's Verdasco match might be rough on
> JWT... Simon-Tsonga is not out of the question... and does Djokovic
> have the gear to get to Federer again... on any given night who knows?
> OR RODDICK taking out Djokovic... would that give Fed a finals
> birth??? Fed-Simon would be anti-climatic for sure... Fed-Tsonga or
> Djokovic-Tsonga would be a MASH FEST! Not to mention Roger-Rafa on HC
> for the first time in a slam ever... talk about bragging rights...

The only thing certain is that the men's tournament is moving
inexorably toward the Verdasco-Del Potro final for which David W. has
been beseeching the tennis gods. :)

Joe Ramirez


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:56:41
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 jan, 18:50, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 11:16=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 26 jan, 17:29, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features o=
f
> > > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> > > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> > > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since h=
e
> > > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > > pro, he can hit forehands from his backhand corner all day long. For
> > > other players, camping at the backhand corner while leaving the entir=
e
> > > court open poses serious defensive coverage problems. Because of his
> > > god-gifted speed and the Babolat's retrieving capacity, Nadal makes a
> > > complete mockery of this traditional tennis wisdom and risk managemen=
t
> > > strategy. From his backhand corner and with his forehand, he can hit
> > > anywhere on the other side of the net. This kind of dynamics is uniqu=
e
> > > and favors nobody but Nadal.
>
> > He really doesn't need to and can't possibly cover the court twice as
> > well as anyone out there. Besides, many players hit inside out
> > forehands and have a lot of success doing it.
>
> I don't think anybody does it like Nadal.
>
> > The difference is the spin. When Nadal runs around to hit the forehand
> > the massive spin he puts on the ball gives him greater angles, curve
> > and air on the shot. The opponent's in trouble handling if they get
> > their racquet on the ball, because of the bounce and weight of shot.
> > But most importantly Nadal gets some extra time to recover from that
> > position so he doesn't leave the whole court open.
>
> There's more to it than just spin. It's also about angle and
> placement. Nadal hits with a lot of spin from any position. But he is
> extremely reliable and accurate with that inside-out forehand. He can
> make very low percentage shots from there almost at will. Shots that
> kiss the line very regularly. Especially the cross-court inside-out
> ones.

But it's the spin that provides control. Not to say that everyone else
could emulate this and be as effective at it since producing that
supreme spin obviously took years to perfect. To be as effective as
Rafa one would have to be a superb athlete in the first place and
dedicate himself for years almost entirely to this specific
shotmaking.

> I still think Nadal can hit so freely and aggressively and with such
> confidence from that position because he is extremely confident about
> his movement (in case a defensive situation arises). He has to be
> backing himself up 100% mentally there. He needs to be thinking he is
> better than all other players in terms of movement. And I think he
> actually is better than them. Otherwise this strategy wouldn't work
> day in and day out.

His movement is exceptionally good, but almost entirely specialized
for producing massive spin. Of course he's gotten better at
implementing different options in his game but it still holds true. I
say he's as confident in running around the backhand because he knows
he can recover in time by using that spin.

> In fact, once Nadal loses half a step, I think this will probably
> become a very risky strategy.

Yes, no question. But I suppose he can still improve his backhand,
before that happens, to counter the lost step.

> > So the spin, and therefore extra time he give himself to recover, make
> > it a safe and favourite option for Rafa. We don't have to like
> > watching it happen over and over though. Usually the best time to
> > watch Rafa is when he plays someone who can prevent him taking control
> > over the point and set this Rafa-specific-dynamic in to play ;)
>
> Of course. :) I see Rafa's style of play and I say to myself somebody
> needs to beat this idiot and put him in his proper place. But I also
> know that's just my stylistic bias that I have developed over the
> years of watching tennis. It's not a whole lot different than Whimpy
> saying that Mac/Sampras style S/V is the only best style of playing
> tennis.

At least you can acknowledge your bias for what it is, contrary to
Whimper who considers a S/V player playing at his best should
automatically beat an all courter/baseliner at his best.

> The fact of the matter is, no matter how much I dislike Rafa's style
> of play, he is here to stay, and he is doing everything within the
> rules of the game. He is a very interesting specimen of a tennis
> player at this juncture of tennis history.

Agree. He seems to have sped up recently between points. Can anyone
confirm? Is he still frequently taking too much time? I haven't
noticed it any more anyway.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:30:35
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 9:11=A0am, topspin <goolagong...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end o=
f
> > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit =
2
> > hours.
>
> > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tenni=
s
> > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > --
> > Cheers,
>
> > vc
>
> Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
> Lots of =A0- fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, yes;
> obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
> ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
> candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
> leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and
>
> For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
> the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
> smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
> the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]
>
> Personally I find Nadal impressive and rather thrilling to watch. He
> was playing a rather weary Gonzalez today, but the men's competition
> is boiling up nicely and looks as competitive a quarter final line up
> as any slam of recent memory (top 7 seeds still in in the men's).
> Unless there are injuries, the winner will have earned their title.

++ RIGHT... great tournament... and I agree with whomever said that
there are some twists to come... the tournament going almost to
ranking so far - out side of Murray - might hold BUT Murray's exit
might be the start of the upsets coming in the SECOND week as opposed
to the first... I can see Simon beating Nadal but aside from that
upset Nadal gets to the finals... I don't think Tsonga is playing well
enough to unglue Rafa... they would be playing at night and Tsonga
won't melt... of course Tsonga's Verdasco match might be rough on
JWT... Simon-Tsonga is not out of the question... and does Djokovic
have the gear to get to Federer again... on any given night who knows?
OR RODDICK taking out Djokovic... would that give Fed a finals
birth??? Fed-Simon would be anti-climatic for sure... Fed-Tsonga or
Djokovic-Tsonga would be a MASH FEST! Not to mention Roger-Rafa on HC
for the first time in a slam ever... talk about bragging rights...

P


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:21:13
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 8:33=A0am, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end=
of
> > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hi=
t 2
> > > hours.
>
> > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements fro=
m
> > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective ten=
nis
> > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
>
> > > vc
>
> > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
> > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > pro,
>
> I know you're using hyperbole here, but do you really think Nadal
> covers the court any better than
> Monfils does? I'm thinking Monfils might be one of the top 2 or 3 pure
> athletes I've ever seen on a tennis court.

++ Nadal can get to even the best drop shots and as he's charging 8
times out of 10 (say) actually hit a shot that puts the OTHER GUY in
trouble/have to scramble... it's amazing... it all but stopped Feds
from dropping Nadal :)

Side to side and to net combined Nadal covers amazingly... BUT YES
some of Monfils wide out coverages are OUTRAGEOUS! BUT when he gets to
them he doesn't have the body control to hit shots like Nadal does...
Monfils is sliding into them meaning he's a half step slower than
Nadal who often gets there on the run... maybe Nadal just explodes
first step faster but Monfils in a 200meters would wipe Nadal...
probably... Nadal has sprinter like explosivity...

P


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:50:49
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 11:16=A0pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 26 jan, 17:29, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
> > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > pro, he can hit forehands from his backhand corner all day long. For
> > other players, camping at the backhand corner while leaving the entire
> > court open poses serious defensive coverage problems. Because of his
> > god-gifted speed and the Babolat's retrieving capacity, Nadal makes a
> > complete mockery of this traditional tennis wisdom and risk management
> > strategy. From his backhand corner and with his forehand, he can hit
> > anywhere on the other side of the net. This kind of dynamics is unique
> > and favors nobody but Nadal.
>
> He really doesn't need to and can't possibly cover the court twice as
> well as anyone out there. Besides, many players hit inside out
> forehands and have a lot of success doing it.
>

I don't think anybody does it like Nadal.

> The difference is the spin. When Nadal runs around to hit the forehand
> the massive spin he puts on the ball gives him greater angles, curve
> and air on the shot. The opponent's in trouble handling if they get
> their racquet on the ball, because of the bounce and weight of shot.
> But most importantly Nadal gets some extra time to recover from that
> position so he doesn't leave the whole court open.
>

There's more to it than just spin. It's also about angle and
placement. Nadal hits with a lot of spin from any position. But he is
extremely reliable and accurate with that inside-out forehand. He can
make very low percentage shots from there almost at will. Shots that
kiss the line very regularly. Especially the cross-court inside-out
ones.

I still think Nadal can hit so freely and aggressively and with such
confidence from that position because he is extremely confident about
his movement (in case a defensive situation arises). He has to be
backing himself up 100% mentally there. He needs to be thinking he is
better than all other players in terms of movement. And I think he
actually is better than them. Otherwise this strategy wouldn't work
day in and day out.

In fact, once Nadal loses half a step, I think this will probably
become a very risky strategy.

> So the spin, and therefore extra time he give himself to recover, make
> it a safe and favourite option for Rafa. We don't have to like
> watching it happen over and over though. Usually the best time to
> watch Rafa is when he plays someone who can prevent him taking control
> over the point and set this Rafa-specific-dynamic in to play ;)

Of course. :) I see Rafa's style of play and I say to myself somebody
needs to beat this idiot and put him in his proper place. But I also
know that's just my stylistic bias that I have developed over the
years of watching tennis. It's not a whole lot different than Whimpy
saying that Mac/Sampras style S/V is the only best style of playing
tennis.

The fact of the matter is, no matter how much I dislike Rafa's style
of play, he is here to stay, and he is doing everything within the
rules of the game. He is a very interesting specimen of a tennis
player at this juncture of tennis history.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:03:59
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:

> The fact of the matter is, no matter how much I dislike Rafa's style
> of play, he is here to stay, and he is doing everything within the
> rules of the game. He is a very interesting specimen of a tennis
> player at this juncture of tennis history.

I don't think it will take long time until this post is responded by
Haze :-) You know, the ass picking thing.

But yes, I agree in some sense. He is maybe not my favorite player since
one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is because of its
esthetic features. But I tend to like Nadal more and more because he is
a fascinating character in the sport. His mental supremacy and his
powerful style is really remarkable.

PS.


   
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:08:11
From: TT
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Petter Solbu wrote:
>
> But yes, I agree in some sense. He is maybe not my favorite player since
> one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is because of its
> esthetic features. But I tend to like Nadal more and more because he is
> a fascinating character in the sport. His mental supremacy and his
> powerful style is really remarkable.
>
> PS.

Shouldn't you be watching Synchronized swimming instead?

--
"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: 26 Jan 2009 19:13:41
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
TT wrote:
> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>
>> But yes, I agree in some sense. He is maybe not my favorite player
>> since one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is because of its
>> esthetic features. But I tend to like Nadal more and more because he
>> is a fascinating character in the sport. His mental supremacy and his
>> powerful style is really remarkable.
>>
>> PS.
>
> Shouldn't you be watching Synchronized swimming instead?
>

Nope. Tennis is the best combination of power, mental strength, style
and fairness among the sports. Do you know other colors than black and
white?

PS.


     
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:24:19
From: TT
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Petter Solbu wrote:
> TT wrote:
>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>
>>> But yes, I agree in some sense. He is maybe not my favorite player
>>> since one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is because of
>>> its esthetic features. But I tend to like Nadal more and more because
>>> he is a fascinating character in the sport. His mental supremacy and
>>> his powerful style is really remarkable.
>>>
>>> PS.
>>
>> Shouldn't you be watching Synchronized swimming instead?
>>
>
> Nope. Tennis is the best combination of power, mental strength, style
> and fairness among the sports. Do you know other colors than black and
> white?
>
> PS.

Well you did say that you "see tennis special because of aesthetic
features"...I'm sure following synchro swimming or say figure skating
would be more fulfilling activity for you.


--
"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: 26 Jan 2009 20:24:00
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
TT wrote:
> Petter Solbu wrote:
>> TT wrote:
>>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But yes, I agree in some sense. He is maybe not my favorite player
>>>> since one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is because of
>>>> its esthetic features. But I tend to like Nadal more and more
>>>> because he is a fascinating character in the sport. His mental
>>>> supremacy and his powerful style is really remarkable.
>>>>
>>>> PS.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't you be watching Synchronized swimming instead?
>>>
>>
>> Nope. Tennis is the best combination of power, mental strength, style
>> and fairness among the sports. Do you know other colors than black and
>> white?
>>
>> PS.
>
> Well you did say that you "see tennis special because of aesthetic
> features"...I'm sure following synchro swimming or say figure skating
> would be more fulfilling activity for you.

Read again. I said "one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is
because of its esthetic features". But since you only see black or white
you ignore the grey and the beige. Stop doing that.

PS.


     
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:19:32
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?

"Petter Solbu" <pettermann1984@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:Lb6dnXDb9rn2YODURVnzvQA@telenor.com...
> TT wrote:
>> Petter Solbu wrote:
>>>
>>> But yes, I agree in some sense. He is maybe not my favorite player since
>>> one of the reasons why I see tennis as special is because of its
>>> esthetic features. But I tend to like Nadal more and more because he is
>>> a fascinating character in the sport. His mental supremacy and his
>>> powerful style is really remarkable.
>>>
>>> PS.
>>
>> Shouldn't you be watching Synchronized swimming instead?
>>
>
> Nope. Tennis is the best combination of power, mental strength, style and
> fairness among the sports.

That would be a nice signature, may I?
For a while..




 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:38:41
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 11:07=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>
> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
> >remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
> >there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>
> That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)

Or like Federer saying Nadal is a great competitor and champion but
one-dimensional.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:36:25
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 10:33=A0pm, Jason Catlin <jason-cat...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end=
of
> > > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hi=
t 2
> > > hours.
>
> > > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements fro=
m
> > > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective ten=
nis
> > > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
>
> > > vc
>
> > I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> > begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> > his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> > head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> > When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> > runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> > repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> > It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
> > can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> > pro,
>
> I know you're using hyperbole here,

How about "leagues ahead"?

> but do you really think Nadal
> covers the court any better than
> Monfils does?

It's difficult to say. What has Monfils done with his coverage? And
what has Nadal?

> I'm thinking Monfils might be one of the top 2 or 3 pure
> athletes I've ever seen on a tennis court.

Sure. But I don't find him anything to write home about.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:28:50
From: topspin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 Jan, 17:19, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:11:41 -0800 (PST), topspin
>
> <goolagong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Personally I find Nadal impressive and rather thrilling to watch. He
> >was playing a rather weary Gonzalez today, but the men's competition
> >is boiling up nicely and looks as competitive a quarter final line up
> >as any slam of recent memory (top 7 seeds still in in the men's).
> >Unless there are injuries, the winner will have earned their title.
>
> 7 of top 8 seeds.

What I meant to write! :-)


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:16:29
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 jan, 17:29, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:

> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> pro, he can hit forehands from his backhand corner all day long. For
> other players, camping at the backhand corner while leaving the entire
> court open poses serious defensive coverage problems. Because of his
> god-gifted speed and the Babolat's retrieving capacity, Nadal makes a
> complete mockery of this traditional tennis wisdom and risk management
> strategy. From his backhand corner and with his forehand, he can hit
> anywhere on the other side of the net. This kind of dynamics is unique
> and favors nobody but Nadal.

He really doesn't need to and can't possibly cover the court twice as
well as anyone out there. Besides, many players hit inside out
forehands and have a lot of success doing it.

The difference is the spin. When Nadal runs around to hit the forehand
the massive spin he puts on the ball gives him greater angles, curve
and air on the shot. The opponent's in trouble handling if they get
their racquet on the ball, because of the bounce and weight of shot.
But most importantly Nadal gets some extra time to recover from that
position so he doesn't leave the whole court open.

So the spin, and therefore extra time he give himself to recover, make
it a safe and favourite option for Rafa. We don't have to like
watching it happen over and over though. Usually the best time to
watch Rafa is when he plays someone who can prevent him taking control
over the point and set this Rafa-specific-dynamic in to play ;)


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 18:31:34
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
kaennorsing wrote:

> He really doesn't need to and can't possibly cover the court twice as
> well as anyone out there. Besides, many players hit inside out
> forehands and have a lot of success doing it.
>
> The difference is the spin. When Nadal runs around to hit the forehand
> the massive spin he puts on the ball gives him greater angles, curve
> and air on the shot. The opponent's in trouble handling if they get
> their racquet on the ball, because of the bounce and weight of shot.
> But most importantly Nadal gets some extra time to recover from that
> position so he doesn't leave the whole court open.
>
> So the spin, and therefore extra time he give himself to recover, make
> it a safe and favourite option for Rafa. We don't have to like
> watching it happen over and over though. Usually the best time to
> watch Rafa is when he plays someone who can prevent him taking control
> over the point and set this Rafa-specific-dynamic in to play ;)

Absolutely. Good post!

PS.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:11:41
From: topspin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 Jan, 15:45, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc

Because there isn't much 'respect' for anyone or anything round here.
Lots of - fandom (real or contrived), yes; points scoring abuse, yes;
obsession with slam counts, yes - but respect, that is thin on the
ground. The obsession with anointing a 'greatest' and rubbishing
candidates you don't like is like a pack of wild dogs searching for a
leader. Also I think Nadal is more popular among younger people, and

For myself I am sincerely hoping Federer wins his 14th slam asap, so
the fiction that slam count alone decides the greatest is blown to
smithereens, and the focus gets back on player-to-player results in
the here and now. [PS No chance! :-)]

Personally I find Nadal impressive and rather thrilling to watch. He
was playing a rather weary Gonzalez today, but the men's competition
is boiling up nicely and looks as competitive a quarter final line up
as any slam of recent memory (top 7 seeds still in in the men's).
Unless there are injuries, the winner will have earned their title.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:19:27
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:11:41 -0800 (PST), topspin
<goolagongfan@hotmail.com > wrote:

>Personally I find Nadal impressive and rather thrilling to watch. He
>was playing a rather weary Gonzalez today, but the men's competition
>is boiling up nicely and looks as competitive a quarter final line up
>as any slam of recent memory (top 7 seeds still in in the men's).
>Unless there are injuries, the winner will have earned their title.

7 of top 8 seeds.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 10:39=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 08:29:49 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
>
> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> >begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> >his game.
>
> Now if you had admitted a little earlier that Nadal has improved and
> there are some impressive features in his game, we would have avoided
> one long thread some time ago =A0:-)

But I did say in that thread that Nadal has improved. I also said that
I don't like his playing style. Still holds now. It's unique, it has
brought him amazing, impressive results, I can see the mechanisms
within. And overall I still don't like it. That's not how I personally
would play tennis, nor would I suggest anyone to copy Nadal.

My stance is a little complicated and some of the folks probably
misread it. I think Javier got the drift of what I was saying, IIRC.

And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:07:26
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
<arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote:

>And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.

That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)


   
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:31:19
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some curious
>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loose in
>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
>
> That was like Vari praising Nadal :-)

I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why you
think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.

But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)

--
Cheers,

vc


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 08:33:27
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> > And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end o=
f
> > the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit =
2
> > hours.
>
> > Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> > RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> > the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> > Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tenni=
s
> > that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> > historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> > --
> > Cheers,
>
> > vc
>
> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> pro,

I know you're using hyperbole here, but do you really think Nadal
covers the court any better than
Monfils does? I'm thinking Monfils might be one of the top 2 or 3 pure
athletes I've ever seen on a tennis court.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 08:29:49
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 9:45=A0pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc


I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.

When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
pro, he can hit forehands from his backhand corner all day long. For
other players, camping at the backhand corner while leaving the entire
court open poses serious defensive coverage problems. Because of his
god-gifted speed and the Babolat's retrieving capacity, Nadal makes a
complete mockery of this traditional tennis wisdom and risk management
strategy. From his backhand corner and with his forehand, he can hit
anywhere on the other side of the net. This kind of dynamics is unique
and favors nobody but Nadal.



  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 08:19:10
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 27, 9:56=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:00:11 GMT, "Vari L. Cinicke"
>
>
>
> <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >Sakari Lund wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:02:37 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 27, 1:31 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:02:19 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
> >>>>> <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> And long threads are not bad per se. It helps clear confusions. I
> >>>>>> don't deem you particularly bright, though. You have made some cur=
ious
> >>>>>> remarks about me in the recent past. There's a screw a little loos=
e in
> >>>>>> there somewhere. But in general you are a more than good poster.
> >>>>> That was like Vari praising Nadal =A0:-)
> >>>> I don't recall thinking Nadal dumb let alone calling him dumb. Why y=
ou
> >>>> think that I think that Nadal has a screw loose, I will never know.
>
> >>>> But it is true that Nadal is a more than good player. :-)
>
> >>> Sakari was trying to wind up both of us. Very sly. A different
> >>> personality than the more straightforward Mikko and the troll TJT, fo=
r
> >>> sure. :)
>
> >> Wow. You call me stupid clear and loud in many different ways. I take
> >> it with humour and in good spirit, and you STILL have something to
> >> complain about?
>
> >I think you hurt arnab's feelings by not seeing him in the same light he
> >sees himself. He will never forgive you.
>
> Gotta say I don't understand arnab's last two posts at all. I must be
> missing something here.

A screw that fell off? What's going on? :)


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 06:59:16
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 26, 9:45 pm, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>>
>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>>
>> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
>> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
>> hours.
>>
>> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
>> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
>> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>>
>> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
>> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
>> historically rewarded risk taking.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> vc
>
>
> I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
> begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
> his game. His style is simply eccentric. He has turned tennis on its
> head, mangled it and forced it to bend around his playing style.
>
> When Nadal wants to be aggressive, he doesn't hit harder per se. He
> runs faster along the baseline. He stops hitting his backhand and
> repeatedly hits different kinds of forehands from his backhand side.
> It's an extremely unusual style of play. Since he is so fast, since he
> can cover the court so well, probably twice as well than any other
> pro, he can hit forehands from his backhand corner all day long. For
> other players, camping at the backhand corner while leaving the entire
> court open poses serious defensive coverage problems. Because of his
> god-gifted speed and the Babolat's retrieving capacity, Nadal makes a
> complete mockery of this traditional tennis wisdom and risk management
> strategy. From his backhand corner and with his forehand, he can hit
> anywhere on the other side of the net. This kind of dynamics is unique
> and favors nobody but Nadal.
>


You're attributing a large part of his ability to a specific tennis
racket....?



  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 18:39:47
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 08:29:49 -0800 (PST), "arnab.z@gmail"
<arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote:

>I like Nadal's game these days much more than before, however
>begrudgingly. I have come to appreciate some of the quirky features of
>his game.

Now if you had admitted a little earlier that Nadal has improved and
there are some impressive features in his game, we would have avoided
one long thread some time ago :-)


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 08:15:51
From: Pedro Dias
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 10:45=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.

I think the main reason was that he was in Murray's half, and Murray
was the dominant player of the lead-up to the tournament, with wins
over the top seeds. Combine that with the fact that Nadal has a
mediocre resume on hardcourts, and it was just hard to take his wins
over lower-ranked players as serious indicators.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure I'm ready to. On the other hand, I
have underestimated Nadal at virtually every turn, *and* it's hard to
see anyone else as a convincing favorite either: both Federer and
Djokovic have had a dodgy run, and no-one else has the pedigree.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 08:12:47
From: ghell666
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On 26 Jan, 15:55, Steve Jaros <sjar...@cox.net > wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 9:45=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> > He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> > covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> > Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> two reasons: first, he has no history of serious slam success on hard
> courts, and in particular at the AO. if he were posting these
> scorelines on clay or grass, we'd all be saying he's in top form.
> second, up until yesterday, his opponents had been quite week.
>
> however, beating a top player like gonzo with the same ease changes
> things. i now believe that nadal has found the key to success on these
> rubbery AO HCs (which we've always have known should have suited his
> game) and that now he has a clear path to the final, where he will be
> a very formidable foe for either joke or fed.
>
> since fed/joke have to play each other, Nadal has got the best chance
> to win the title, IMO.

Yes, Nadals in very good position but he hasnt been challanged much
yet either i.e. Tsonga could give him hell and SImons wear him out a
bit too .

Fed , should he beat Porto, might go into the final with a big plus
over Nadal if Roddick can do him a favour.

Something tells me theres few twists in this yet , I guess we'll see
tonight if Roger can start peaking for his tormentor.

A fed / nadal final would be the best case scenario , Djoker inspite
of bad form seems to be winning when it matters too unlike Murray who
wasnt able to raise his game .







 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 16:56:04
From: Petter Solbu
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
Vari L. Cinicke wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.
>

Well, I think Nadal has impressed the most of the four top seeds. He
will be very hard to beat, no question. But I am looking forward to
Simon. If he destroys Simon as he has done to his opponents so far, I
will have him as a favorite to win the tournament. Yet, beating a tired
Gonzalez not at his best, an old Haas and two nobodies it is hard to
judge his performance relatively to the other guys remaining in the field.

PS.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 07:55:27
From: Steve Jaros
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
> On Jan 26, 9:45=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.

two reasons: first, he has no history of serious slam success on hard
courts, and in particular at the AO. if he were posting these
scorelines on clay or grass, we'd all be saying he's in top form.
second, up until yesterday, his opponents had been quite week.

however, beating a top player like gonzo with the same ease changes
things. i now believe that nadal has found the key to success on these
rubbery AO HCs (which we've always have known should have suited his
game) and that now he has a clear path to the final, where he will be
a very formidable foe for either joke or fed.

since fed/joke have to play each other, Nadal has got the best chance
to win the title, IMO.



  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 16:06:43
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 07:55:27 -0800 (PST), Steve Jaros
<sjaros3@cox.net > wrote:

>> On Jan 26, 9:45 am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
>> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>>
>> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
>two reasons: first, he has no history of serious slam success on hard
>courts, and in particular at the AO. if he were posting these
>scorelines on clay or grass, we'd all be saying he's in top form.
>second, up until yesterday, his opponents had been quite week.
>
>however, beating a top player like gonzo with the same ease changes
>things. i now believe that nadal has found the key to success on these
>rubbery AO HCs (which we've always have known should have suited his
>game) and that now he has a clear path to the final, where he will be
>a very formidable foe for either joke or fed.
>
>since fed/joke have to play each other, Nadal has got the best chance
>to win the title, IMO.


you forget one thing .... Gonzo was nackered from his previous match.
I mean really really nackered.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 07:52:58
From: Giovanna
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
he can play effective, yet HORRIBLE & BORING tennis~~


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 07:49:56
From: PeteWasLucky
Subject: Re: Why is Nadal getting no respect?
On Jan 26, 10:45=A0am, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cini...@netscape.net > wrote:
> He is making very few UEs and is hitting lots of safe winners and is
> covering the court easily and letting his forehand rule.
>
> Oh, and blowing away all his opponents.
>
> And he is very fresh and hungry after taking some time off at the end of
> the season while others were battling on. His longest match barely hit 2
> hours.
>
> Why does he not get enough respect except from (poetically gushing)
> RahimAsif? I am discounting the normatively irrational statements from
> the usual suspects (TJT, Whisper).
>
> Sounds as if many here think that the brand of safe and effective tennis
> that Nadal is playing ought not to pay dividends on HCs which have
> historically rewarded risk taking.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> vc

Nadal made SF on HC many times, and he has a chance to reach the final
this year and may be win it.
But I don't really like his game although I respect his strong will.