info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
My theory proven correct
80 views
Skip to first unread message
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 10:23:30 AM6/8/19
to
Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
Thiem is primary a clay-courter and as such has certain abilities
that Djokovic lacks or if he has them, is not as good as Thiem.
Injecting his own pace is one of those.
How many times Thiem hit winners off of Djokovic's junkballs, as
opposed to Djokovic committing UEs when dealing with Thiem's
floaters.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
Thiem is primary a clay-courter and as such has certain abilities
that Djokovic lacks or if he has them, is not as good as Thiem.
Injecting his own pace is one of those.
How many times Thiem hit winners off of Djokovic's junkballs, as
opposed to Djokovic committing UEs when dealing with Thiem's
floaters.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
guypers
Jun 8, 2019, 10:26:05 AM6/8/19
to
Calimero
Jun 8, 2019, 11:44:34 AM6/8/19
to
On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 4:23:30 PM UTC+2, *skriptis wrote:
> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like. ...
> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
I think this is a general rule - matches are usually won by the better player.
Do you agree?
Max
—
“Democrats fear Barr, you can smell it.“
(Washington Post, May 2nd, 2019)
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 12:12:37 PM6/8/19
to
Calimero <calim...@gmx.de> Wrote in message:
But what I meant, and talked about last year, is that an evenly
contested match that goes deep into fifth, is not decided in
mental department, ie it's misleading to analyze those matches
from such point of view.
> On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 4:23:30 PM UTC+2, *skriptis wrote:
>> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
>> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like. ...
>
>
>
> I think this is a general rule - matches are usually won by the better player.
> Do you agree?
Not necessarily
>> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
>> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like. ...
>
>
>
> I think this is a general rule - matches are usually won by the better player.
> Do you agree?
But what I meant, and talked about last year, is that an evenly
contested match that goes deep into fifth, is not decided in
mental department, ie it's misleading to analyze those matches
from such point of view.
TT
Jun 8, 2019, 12:59:24 PM6/8/19
to
*skriptis kirjoitti 8.6.2019 klo 19:12:
> Calimero <calim...@gmx.de> Wrote in message:
>> On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 4:23:30 PM UTC+2, *skriptis wrote:
>>> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
>>> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like. ...
>>
>>
>>
>> I think this is a general rule - matches are usually won by the better player.
>> Do you agree?
>
>
> Not necessarily
>
>
> But what I meant, and talked about last year, is that an evenly
> contested match that goes deep into fifth, is not decided in
> mental department, ie it's misleading to analyze those matches
> from such point of view.
>
>
You're just making excuses for Djokovic who lost exactly because he was
> Calimero <calim...@gmx.de> Wrote in message:
>> On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 4:23:30 PM UTC+2, *skriptis wrote:
>>> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
>>> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like. ...
>>
>>
>>
>> I think this is a general rule - matches are usually won by the better player.
>> Do you agree?
>
>
> Not necessarily
>
>
> But what I meant, and talked about last year, is that an evenly
> contested match that goes deep into fifth, is not decided in
> mental department, ie it's misleading to analyze those matches
> from such point of view.
>
>
the mentally weaker player... even weaker than Thiem.
arahim
Jun 8, 2019, 1:00:51 PM6/8/19
to
On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 7:23:30 AM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
>
That is true of sets 1, 2, 3, 4 as well.
> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
>
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 1:20:37 PM6/8/19
to
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 1:41:15 PM6/8/19
to
arahim <arahim...@hotmail.com> Wrote in message:
When we talk about deep five setters, those are kinda matches that
if they were football/soccer matches would have ended in penalty
shoutouts.
And at that point, technical superiority has been historically
almost entirely overlooked, all the emphasis, at least from fans
point of view, was on mythical "mental" strength.
Like, only "losers" lose on penalties? Forgetting that penalties
can be practiced. If someone is technically better than you,
he'll usually win. Guts or desire can't always compensate.
This match came down to Djokovic being unable to put those
pace-less shots away in a classical clay-courter fashion, which
Thiem did regulary. There were tons of them.
If he had done that, he would have won in 4 probably, but since he
didn't and couldn't win those points, neither in first, or fifth
set, when it came down to few points deep in the fifth, that very
crucial aspect of clay court tennis that Thiem was better at
proved pivotal.
Nadal plays with so much intensity, has powerful shots, which
actually suits Djokovic, at least in shot making sense.
Of course, the conditions were awful. Both Djokovic and Federer
who like indoors and enjoyed success there were surely far more
affected with this mess than Nadal or Thiem whose games are
traditionally more suited and more successful for outdoor
conditions.
> On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 7:23:30 AM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
>> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
>> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
>>
> That is true of sets 1, 2, 3, 4 as well.
That's off topic.
>> Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
>> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
>>
> That is true of sets 1, 2, 3, 4 as well.
When we talk about deep five setters, those are kinda matches that
if they were football/soccer matches would have ended in penalty
shoutouts.
And at that point, technical superiority has been historically
almost entirely overlooked, all the emphasis, at least from fans
point of view, was on mythical "mental" strength.
Like, only "losers" lose on penalties? Forgetting that penalties
can be practiced. If someone is technically better than you,
he'll usually win. Guts or desire can't always compensate.
This match came down to Djokovic being unable to put those
pace-less shots away in a classical clay-courter fashion, which
Thiem did regulary. There were tons of them.
If he had done that, he would have won in 4 probably, but since he
didn't and couldn't win those points, neither in first, or fifth
set, when it came down to few points deep in the fifth, that very
crucial aspect of clay court tennis that Thiem was better at
proved pivotal.
Nadal plays with so much intensity, has powerful shots, which
actually suits Djokovic, at least in shot making sense.
Of course, the conditions were awful. Both Djokovic and Federer
who like indoors and enjoyed success there were surely far more
affected with this mess than Nadal or Thiem whose games are
traditionally more suited and more successful for outdoor
conditions.
bob
Jun 8, 2019, 1:51:34 PM6/8/19
to
weak in 28 matches VS rafa.
bob
bob
Jun 8, 2019, 1:51:34 PM6/8/19
to
On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:23:29 +0200 (CEST), *skriptis
<skri...@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
>Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
>
>
>
>Thiem is primary a clay-courter and as such has certain abilities
> that Djokovic lacks or if he has them, is not as good as Thiem.
>
>
>Injecting his own pace is one of those.
>
>How many times Thiem hit winners off of Djokovic's junkballs, as
> opposed to Djokovic committing UEs when dealing with Thiem's
> floaters.
makes sense as it comes down to just a natural reaction. less
<skri...@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
>Matches that go deep into fifth set, are usually won by better
> player on the surface. Or those "more natural" if you like.
>
>
>
>Thiem is primary a clay-courter and as such has certain abilities
> that Djokovic lacks or if he has them, is not as good as Thiem.
>
>
>Injecting his own pace is one of those.
>
>How many times Thiem hit winners off of Djokovic's junkballs, as
> opposed to Djokovic committing UEs when dealing with Thiem's
> floaters.
thinking, less plotting. more "reaction." and he who is most natural
to the surface will have the advantage, as he's just playing "natural"
tennis by that pt.
bob
TT
Jun 8, 2019, 2:18:21 PM6/8/19
to
gifted some crucial points/games to Thiem. And I'm not even referring to
the first set tanking. Djoke managed to outchoke Thiem which is an
achievement in itself.
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 2:28:15 PM6/8/19
to
TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
Fanboys/haters tend to view entire game though these lenses. Ie
mental stuff.
TT
Jun 8, 2019, 2:56:44 PM6/8/19
to
pathetic choking... because you're a fucking Serb yourself.
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 4:49:57 PM6/8/19
to
Serbs would be Djokovic fans?
Chauvinistic idiot.
Djokovic didn't choke, he was having problem hitting same shots
throughout the match, whether in first or fifth set.
arahim
Jun 8, 2019, 5:17:38 PM6/8/19
to
TT
Jun 8, 2019, 5:32:25 PM6/8/19
to
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 5:41:46 PM6/8/19
to
bob <b...@bob.com> Wrote in message:
Excellent point bob.
Many of the so called mentally greatest players have said the key
is to simply forget about the scoreboard.
E.g. Seles on some occasions was so in, that she forgot the score,
literally. Then, we know Navratilova saying she needed to
concentrate on concentrating.
All in all, it's quite simple.
In close situations, the mentally stronger player is the one who
is able to forget about the importance of situation and just play
his game.
You don't win by "thinking" and saying yourself I'm in an
important situation so I better win.
If you're required to concentrate extra, to think about stuff, you
can outmuscle opponent in couple of pts, but the guy who is able
to play with less thinking, By just playing his stuff, will
usually prevail.
Many of the so called mentally greatest players have said the key
is to simply forget about the scoreboard.
E.g. Seles on some occasions was so in, that she forgot the score,
literally. Then, we know Navratilova saying she needed to
concentrate on concentrating.
All in all, it's quite simple.
In close situations, the mentally stronger player is the one who
is able to forget about the importance of situation and just play
his game.
You don't win by "thinking" and saying yourself I'm in an
important situation so I better win.
If you're required to concentrate extra, to think about stuff, you
can outmuscle opponent in couple of pts, but the guy who is able
to play with less thinking, By just playing his stuff, will
usually prevail.
TT
Jun 8, 2019, 5:47:23 PM6/8/19
to
bob
Jun 8, 2019, 6:14:17 PM6/8/19
to
On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 23:41:40 +0200 (CEST), *skriptis
it is obvious that pressure affects different players in all sports
differently. some can shoot a free throw with 3 secs left in NBA
championship, some can make 5 ft putt to win the masters. some can't.
5th set tennis - analyze what's going on.
1. players have played for hours to a basic standoff. i.e. they're
about equal in shotmaking.
2. players are fatiguing.
3. players are thinking - consciously or subconsciously - what must be
done to get off the court with a W.
those who
(a) have a more natural game, i.e. the game that they would play
basically in their sleep, have an advantage. i judge this a those with
the purest strokes.
(b) can put the "moment" in the background and just focus on playing a
*relaxed* point have an advantage.
easier said than done.
bob
differently. some can shoot a free throw with 3 secs left in NBA
championship, some can make 5 ft putt to win the masters. some can't.
5th set tennis - analyze what's going on.
1. players have played for hours to a basic standoff. i.e. they're
about equal in shotmaking.
2. players are fatiguing.
3. players are thinking - consciously or subconsciously - what must be
done to get off the court with a W.
those who
(a) have a more natural game, i.e. the game that they would play
basically in their sleep, have an advantage. i judge this a those with
the purest strokes.
(b) can put the "moment" in the background and just focus on playing a
*relaxed* point have an advantage.
easier said than done.
bob
*skriptis
Jun 8, 2019, 7:02:24 PM6/8/19
to
TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
So on clay, in horrible conditions, vs clay specialist, he wasn't
good enough.
TT
Jun 9, 2019, 1:06:20 AM6/9/19
to
"natural game" theory at all.
As for whose the better player, Djokovic has higher win percentages on
clay than Thiem. He really looked mentally weak here.
...Maybe he was afraid of facing Nadal or something.
RahimAsif
Jun 10, 2019, 3:57:06 PM6/10/19
to
On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 10:06:20 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> ...Maybe he was afraid of facing Nadal or something.
Doubt Djoker would have been afraid of meeting Nadal in a slam final, given what he did do beast mode Nadal at this year's AO...
> ...Maybe he was afraid of facing Nadal or something.
TT
Jun 10, 2019, 4:23:48 PM6/10/19
to
0 new messages