'The Big Four' no more!

[ahonkan]

There hasn't been a single time this season that the Big 4 (or 5 if we
include Ferrer thanks to his ranking) have made it to the SF of a
tournament & Fed hasn't been the only culprit. This is a great opp for
someone like Berd or Waw to break into the elite group. Tennis
promises to be less predictable and more exciting!

[Ulysses]

Tennis won't be more exciting if Berdych is thrown into the mix. He
has one of the most boring games imaginable. He's only slightly less
dull than Ferrer. Dimi has an interesting game, so does Gulbis and
Stan has the lovely one-handed BH. The only one of these that really
has tangible charisma is Gulbis and he can't seem to manage a break-
out win.

[ahonkan]

I don't find Berd any less watchable than Djoker, Murray or Rafa..
IMHO of course.

[Manuel aka Xax]

Have to agree on most!
I'd like to see any of these players to enter the "big game": Dimitrov, Gulbis, Jerzy, Stan...
I can add some names to that list (as forget some who deserves in my eyes, at least), like Benoit Paire.
Speaking about Paire, it might be good news for some better ranked players that Benopit is gonna be seeded at the french, given his form atm.

[phamqua...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, May 18, 2013 3:40:05 AM UTC+10, Ulysses wrote:

> Tennis won't be more exciting if Berdych is thrown into the mix.

Yes it will. Haven't you noticed they show his gf after every Berdych winner? Oh, you're female - that explains.

[Court_1]

Speak for yourself! Who wants to watch a player who makes a career out
of beating a top player in a tournament only to go down tamely in the
next round to the next top player? At least Djokovic, Nadal and even
Murray can actually consistently win big tournaments. In addition,
whether you like or hate Djokovic or Nadal, both of them have
personalities, Berdych has NO personality and no appeal. The guy is
just a huge ball basher whose plan B is to bash the ball even harder.

[jlia...@gmail.com]

What's Nadal's plan B ? Don't tell me hitting more looping moonball is Nadal's Plan B.

[Court_1]

Come on, please do not compare Berdshit to Nadal. Did Nadal not beat
Djokovic on clay three times last year after losing to him badly the
year before? What is Federer's plan B against Nadal on clay, can you
tell me that?

[jlia...@gmail.com]

Speaking like a true Federer fan there court. Nadal is just as one dimensional as Berdych and I did not know you find moonballing is more impressive brand of tennis. Nadal did beat Djokovic on clay but if Djokovic wins the FO this year then he deserves it no less.

[Court_1]

No Nadal is not just as one-dimensional as Berdych and Djokovic will
not win the FO this year, do you want to bet?

[Court_1]

On May 19, 11:54 am, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:

You did not answer my question, what plan B does Federer have against
Nadal ON CLAY?

[jlia...@gmail.com]

Courties' brand of exciting tennis moonballing with those wristy top spun shot and that is just as boring as ball basher. We will see who is right after FO and Nadal will go empty handed at slam this year as I posted a few months ago.

[jlia...@gmail.com]

You did not answer mine either.

[Court_1]

What question did you ask me? And answer my question, what is
Federer's plan be against Nadal on clay?

[Court_1]

Even though I am not a fan of Rafa's brand of tennis, I would watch
him in a heartbeat over Berdych. I never watch any Berdych matches
unless he is playing in a big final against Federer, Nadal or
Djokovic. Other than that I am not interested in players who can't
string a couple of big wins together except once every year and I am
not interested in players who have no personality.

[arahim]

Nadal does rely on one aspect to an extensive level. And Federer keeps on trying the same thing against Nadal. And Berdych may be limited. The thing that goes for Nadal, on clay, is that he wins. You can be as one dimensional as you want as long as you are winning. It is those who are losing who need to make changes to find a way.

[jlia...@gmail.com]

I am not a fan of both and would not watch their match except in finals. I am not interest in player whose only attribute is running like crazy in retrieving, top spun back every thing with little or no variation and that type of tennis is just as boring as big ball bashing style of Berdych. I don't think ass picking and fist pumping represent great personality.

[Court_1]

On May 19, 12:14 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> It is those who are losing who need to make changes to find a way.

Exactly, and Federer has not made any changes to find a way to win on
clay against Nadal, or he has made very few changes. People can say
Nadal is one-dimensional and he is to a certain extent especially on
clay, but he is not the one who has to make the changes. It is only
now against Djokovic on clay that Nadal has been forced to try and
make some changes--i.e. play more aggressively.

[jlia...@gmail.com]

Was that his plan B ?

[Court_1]

Come on jliang, don't play dumb please. Nadal tried to play more
aggressively against Djokovic in 2012 on clay and was successful as he
beat Djokovic three times.

There, I answered your question, now answer mine, what has Federer
tried to do differently to beat Nadal on clay? Come on, I am a Federer
fan and the truth is he had no plan B. As a Federer fan you should be
big enough to be able to admit that. It is what it is.

[jlia...@gmail.com]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 4:51:05 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
> On May 19, 12:25 pm, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Monday, May 20, 2013 2:21:22 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
>
> > > On May 19, 12:14 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > It is those who are losing who need to make changes to find a way.
>
> >
>
> > > Exactly, and Federer has not made any changes to find a way to win on
>
> >
>
> > > clay against Nadal, or he has made very few changes. People can say
>
> >
>
> > > Nadal is one-dimensional and he is to a certain extent especially on
>
> >
>
> > > clay, but he is not the one who has to make the changes. It is only
>
> >
>
> > > now against Djokovic on clay that Nadal has been forced to try and
>
> >
>
> > > make some changes--i.e. play more aggressively.
>
> >
>
> > Was that his plan B ?
>
>
>
> Come on jliang, don't play dumb please. Nadal tried to play more
>
> aggressively against Djokovic in 2012 on clay and was successful as he
>
> beat Djokovic three times.
>

Don't be dumb I watched those matches, you got to be real dumb to believe 2012 Djoker was at same level as he was in 2011. Nadal played the same sort of little moonball shit as he did in 2011. The only Plan B in Nadal's game is to keep the ball in play and reduce the error rate and make the other player play more balls. Doing more of the same is not exactly what you call Plan B. So don't be dumb answer the question what is Nadal's plan B ?

[Court_1]

On May 19, 6:29 pm, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, May 20, 2013 4:51:05 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
> > On May 19, 12:25 pm, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Monday, May 20, 2013 2:21:22 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
>
> > > > On May 19, 12:14 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > It is those who are losing who need to make changes to find a way.
>
> > > > Exactly, and Federer has not made any changes to find a way to win on
>
> > > > clay against Nadal, or he has made very few changes. People can say
>
> > > > Nadal is one-dimensional and he is to a certain extent especially on
>
> > > > clay, but he is not the one who has to make the changes. It is only
>
> > > > now against Djokovic on clay that Nadal has been forced to try and
>
> > > > make some changes--i.e. play more aggressively.
>
> > > Was that his plan B ?
>
> > Come on jliang, don't play dumb please. Nadal tried to play more
>
> > aggressively against Djokovic in 2012 on clay and was successful as he
>
> > beat Djokovic three times.
>
> Don't be dumb I watched those matches, you got to be real dumb to believe 2012 Djoker was at same level as he was in 2011. Nadal played the same sort of little moonball shit as he did in 2011.   The only Plan B in Nadal's game is to keep the ball in play and reduce the error rate and make the other player play more balls.  Doing more of the same is not exactly what you call Plan B. So don't be dumb answer the question what is Nadal's plan B ?

I have answered the question above, it is not my problem if you are
not satisfied with my answer. I have said in my eyes Nadal played more
aggressively at the AO 2012 and beyond. You have not answered my
question about what has Federer done to change his game against Nadal
on clay. I will tell you what he has done: ZERO. Basically in 8 years
he has made very little changes.

If you think Nadal did not do anything differently in 2012 to combat
Djokovic on clay and Nadal only won because Djokovic's level dropped
then you should not feel very confident about Djokovic's chances at
the FO this year Basically what you are saying is Djokovic can only
beat Nadal if Djokovic plays like superman because obviously before
2011 and after 2011 Djokovic could not beat Nadal on clay except for
the lone MC 2013 title. So why are you so sure Djokovic will beat
Nadal there this year?

Look, the FO comes down to two guys--Nadal or Djokovic. Nobody else
has a shot imo. It is possible that if Djokovic makes it to Nadal he
could win it and I will have to see the draw to decide for sure, but
for my money as of right this second, I have to go with Nadal.

[jlia...@gmail.com]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 8:50:18 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
> On May 19, 6:29 pm, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Monday, May 20, 2013 4:51:05 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
>
> > > On May 19, 12:25 pm, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > On Monday, May 20, 2013 2:21:22 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > > On May 19, 12:14 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > > > It is those who are losing who need to make changes to find a way.
>
> >
>
> > > > > Exactly, and Federer has not made any changes to find a way to win on
>
> >
>
> > > > > clay against Nadal, or he has made very few changes. People can say
>
> >
>
> > > > > Nadal is one-dimensional and he is to a certain extent especially on
>
> >
>
> > > > > clay, but he is not the one who has to make the changes. It is only
>
> >
>
> > > > > now against Djokovic on clay that Nadal has been forced to try and
>
> >
>
> > > > > make some changes--i.e. play more aggressively.
>
> >
>
> > > > Was that his plan B ?
>
> >
>
> > > Come on jliang, don't play dumb please. Nadal tried to play more
>
> >
>
> > > aggressively against Djokovic in 2012 on clay and was successful as he
>
> >
>
> > > beat Djokovic three times.
>
> >
>
> > Don't be dumb I watched those matches, you got to be real dumb to believe 2012 Djoker was at same level as he was in 2011. Nadal played the same sort of little moonball shit as he did in 2011.   The only Plan B in Nadal's game is to keep the ball in play and reduce the error rate and make the other player play more balls.  Doing more of the same is not exactly what you call Plan B. So don't be dumb answer the question what is Nadal's plan B ?
>
>
>
> I have answered the question above, it is not my problem if you are
>
> not satisfied with my answer. I have said in my eyes Nadal played more
>
> aggressively at the AO 2012 and beyond. You have not answered my
>
> question about what has Federer done to change his game against Nadal
>
> on clay. I will tell you what he has done: ZERO. Basically in 8 years
>
> he has made very little changes.

Not been able to answer the question satifactorily in my book is same as not answering the question.

>
>
>
> If you think Nadal did not do anything differently in 2012 to combat
>
> Djokovic on clay and Nadal only won because Djokovic's level dropped
>
> then you should not feel very confident about Djokovic's chances at
>
> the FO this year

Actually I feel very confident about Djokovic's chance in this year's FO. He showed his card in MC and there is no need to peak 1 or 2 weeks before FO in some tune ups.

>Basically what you are saying is Djokovic can only
>
> beat Nadal if Djokovic plays like superman because obviously before
>
> 2011 and after 2011 Djokovic could not beat Nadal on clay except for
>
> the lone MC 2013 title. So why are you so sure Djokovic will beat
>
> Nadal there this year?

We will see what happend at FO. I don't think Djoker play a super man match in MC and he beat Nadal.

>
>
>
> Look, the FO comes down to two guys--Nadal or Djokovic. Nobody else
>
> has a shot imo. It is possible that if Djokovic makes it to Nadal he
>
> could win it and I will have to see the draw to decide for sure, but
>
> for my money as of right this second, I have to go with Nadal.

Fine, my money is on Djokovic and he will be focused on the majors rather than rely on tune ups to build his momentum like Nadal.

[ahonkan]

Ditto. What's Djoker's plan B? Or Murray's? Fed is the only
current player who has enough game to play differently vs
different players. I have been privileged to watch him play
four different players - Isner on grass at Wimby (Olympics),
and Fish, Ferrer & Tsonga Indoors HC at O2 and I saw
Fed play differently against each of them. Anybody who
has seen Fed play doesn't need an explanation.
I have also watched 4 matches of Djoker live - vs Simon &
Ferrer at Dubai, vs Tipsy at O2 & vs Tsonga at Wimby
(Olympics) and I saw him play exactly the same way
everywhere. He can vary the pace of his shot greatly
and fire a winner unexpectedly but that's the extent of
his 'variety'.

[Whisper]

Nadal doesn't need a plan B. His plan A beats everyone of this
generation every time.

[Whisper]

On 20/05/2013 8:50 AM, Court_1 wrote:
> On May 19, 6:29 pm, jlian...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, May 20, 2013 4:51:05 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
>>
>>> Come on jliang, don't play dumb please. Nadal tried to play more
>>
>>> aggressively against Djokovic in 2012 on clay and was successful as he
>>
>>> beat Djokovic three times.
>>
>> Don't be dumb I watched those matches, you got to be real dumb to believe 2012 Djoker was at same level as he was in 2011. Nadal played the same sort of little moonball shit as he did in 2011. The only Plan B in Nadal's game is to keep the ball in play and reduce the error rate and make the other player play more balls. Doing more of the same is not exactly what you call Plan B. So don't be dumb answer the question what is Nadal's plan B ?
>
> I have answered the question above, it is not my problem if you are
> not satisfied with my answer. I have said in my eyes Nadal played more
> aggressively at the AO 2012 and beyond. You have not answered my
> question about what has Federer done to change his game against Nadal
> on clay. I will tell you what he has done: ZERO. Basically in 8 years
> he has made very little changes.
>

Definition of insanity - doing the same thing over & over and expecting
a different result.

The golden rule of tennis seems to be one Fed has never embraced -
'Never change a winning game, always change a losing one.'

[kaennorsing]

Op zondag 19 mei 2013 17:58:15 UTC+2 schreef Court_1 het volgende:

I think Fed actually mixes up his gameplans against Rafa too much (on clay) and gets confused. He knows his cruise control game won't cut it so he'll try hitting bigger, standing further back, running around his forehand more, getting in sooner, coming over every backhand, serve volleying, using dropshots etc. What's frustrating to watch is that he never sticks to a game plan imo.

Yesterday he started his first service game serve and volleying a couple times, amounting to his only won service game of the set. The next point he serve volleyed was after losing his serve 4 times in a row or something. Also, early in the first set I believe he tried just one dropshot, then didn't attempt another dropshot until he was hopelessly down and out. Maybe it's fair to say he doesn't really have *any* game plan against Rafa and instead tries everything once in a while and deserts it again for half an hour or so. Like Wahleed said, Fed sometimes looks like he never played professional tennis when facing Rafa.

IMO, he needs to serve volley more, at least 50% on his first serve and use the dropshot *a lot*, while going for broke whenever he sees a ball he can load up on. And don't try to rush in on a shorter ball, by half volleying approach shots that sit up for Rafa; only move in after recognising he's sees Rafa's off balance. That's his only winning game plan vs Rafa on clay. Not doing this leads to what we saw yesterday. Not a pretty sight.

[Court_1]

I am not saying Djokovic or Murray have plan B's, I find them both
pretty boring to watch and I agree Federer has the most variety of of
all those players including Nadal But what does that have to do with
my question: What has Federer done differently with his game plan to
be effective when he has played Nadal on clay? Can somebody answer my
question? Because whenever I see Federer play Nadal on clay I feel
like it is Groundhog's Day.

[Court_1]

On May 20, 7:43 am, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think Fed actually mixes up his gameplans against Rafa too much (on clay) and gets confused. He knows his cruise control game won't cut it so he'll try hitting bigger, standing further back, running around his forehand more, getting in sooner, coming over every backhand, serve volleying, using dropshots etc. What's frustrating to watch is that he never sticks to a game plan imo.
>
> Yesterday he started his first service game serve and volleying a couple times, amounting to his only won service game of the set. The next point he serve volleyed was after losing his serve 4 times in a row or something. Also, early in the first set I believe he tried just one dropshot, then didn't attempt another dropshot until he was hopelessly down and out. Maybe it's fair to say he doesn't really have *any* game plan against Rafa and instead tries everything once in a while and deserts it again for half an hour or so. Like Wahleed said, Fed sometimes looks like he never played professional tennis when facing Rafa.
>
> IMO, he needs to serve volley more, at least 50% on his first serve and use the dropshot *a lot*, while going for broke whenever he sees a ball he can load up on. And don't try to rush in on a shorter ball, by half volleying approach shots that sit up for Rafa; only move in after recognising he's sees Rafa's off balance. That's his only winning game plan vs Rafa on clay. Not doing this leads to what we saw yesterday. Not a pretty sight.

Yes exactly, perhaps it is his attempts at trying to do too much which
make it look like he has no game plan at all against Nadal on clay.
Either way it is the same conclusion, in all of this time, he has not
figured out a way to beat Nadal on clay. Yes, I know he has defeated
Nadal on clay twice but he has been defeated so comprehensively so
much more often by Nadal on clay that I don't even want to watch those
matches any more.

Who wants to watch Federer, one of the most talented players in the
sport get massacred over and over again? What WAS that yesterday? I
watched the first set and then just had the tv on in the backround for
the rest but was not really watching. I had enough. I never expected
Federer to win yesterday but I was not expecting to see what I saw. If
he is getting too old and has deteriorated too much to put in an
effort to even try and beat Nadal at this point why is he playing?
What kind of Fedfan wants to watch that? Only a masochist.

[ca1houn]

I don't want to watch it but federer playing a guy 6 years his younger

[Court_1]

Don't watch it, you will get sick.

[Shakes]

Fed's problem against Nadal is that he's not overwhelmingly reliable
in any particular aspect of the game to keep doing that over 5 sets.
So, it's more like he's unable to stick to a gameplan. And he knows
it. Against other players who are not as good as Nadal, or even Djok
on HC, his cruise control mode is good enough to win his games, and so
he doesn't have to change things too much. He has a few set patterns
of play that serve him well.

> Yesterday he started his first service game serve and volleying a couple times, amounting to his only won service game of the set. The next point he serve volleyed was after losing his serve 4 times in a row or something. Also, early in the first set I believe he tried just one dropshot, then didn't attempt another dropshot until he was hopelessly down and out. Maybe it's fair to say he doesn't really have *any* game plan against Rafa and instead tries everything once in a while and deserts it again for half an hour or so. Like Wahleed said, Fed sometimes looks like he never played professional tennis when facing Rafa.
>
> IMO, he needs to serve volley more, at least 50% on his first serve and use the dropshot *a lot*, while going for broke whenever he sees a ball he can load up on. And don't try to rush in on a shorter ball, by half volleying approach shots that sit up for Rafa; only move in after recognising he's sees Rafa's off balance. That's his only winning game plan vs Rafa on clay. Not doing this leads to what we saw yesterday. Not a pretty sight.

I agree he should S/V more on his 1st serve. But, again, as we've seen
from Fed, he's not really comfortable going forward these days unless
he's absolutely sure of winning the point. He is not comfortable
enough, or reliable enough, to keep doing that (as in play S/V)
through many games.

[Shakes]

I kind of disagree with this plan A and B stuff. The main motive
behind having a plan B is to push an opponent out of his comfort zone
*mentally* more than anything else. And it works against players who
are apt to falter in such scenarios. Against mentally focussed
opponents like Nadal, that usually doesn't work. If your best game -
plan A - is not strong enough to overcome a spirited opponent, rest
assured that your less-than-best game, or so called plan B, won't cut
it either.

Conversely, if your best game - or plan A - is good enough to impose
on your rival on most surfaces, you don't need a plan B.

That brings the question to mind: is a player who can play different
ways, but without being the absolute best in any given aspect, really
more talented than a player who can play one way, but do it better
than anyone else ?

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 20 mei 2013 19:16:44 UTC+2 schreef Shakes het volgende:

> That brings the question to mind: is a player who can play different
>
> ways, but without being the absolute best in any given aspect, really
>
> more talented than a player who can play one way, but do it better
>
> than anyone else ?

The answer depends on how you define talent. Is it the ability to easily and quickly learn new knowledge and/or acquire (any or many) skills. Then yes. Or is it the ability to innovate or excel in a (single or limited number of) skill(s) or area. Then no.

[TT]

I don't think Federer does any shot better than Nadal, apart from serve.
Maybe slice but I don't think neither hits a great slice.