The Tennis Thread
Discussion
McGee_22 said:
Just listening to Inverdale spouting nonsense again on the Beeb and asking whether anyone ever will win 20 Grand Slams again - my wife and I quickly worked out that it would be relatively easy for someone really good to win 20 if they were the only one that is that much better - what is incredible is that three players in the same era have got 20 each - ok, Djoker has 19 but would anyone put money on him not getting 20?
It set me off looking at the records and since 2004 only 5 Mens Singles Grand Slams have been won by anyone other than Rog, Raf, Djoker, Andy and Stan... and Andy and Stan have only 3 each - the other 5 winners were single title winners only.
I remember a category on Pointless about men's grand slam winners since 2005. I think the only Pointless answer was Marin Cilic. It set me off looking at the records and since 2004 only 5 Mens Singles Grand Slams have been won by anyone other than Rog, Raf, Djoker, Andy and Stan... and Andy and Stan have only 3 each - the other 5 winners were single title winners only.
I remember someone (McEnroe I think) saying that had Murray not been in the same era as the big three, he would've probably become one of if not the all time greatest grand slam champion. But that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Thin White Duke said:
I remember a category on Pointless about men's grand slam winners since 2005. I think the only Pointless answer was Marin Cilic.
I remember someone (McEnroe I think) saying that had Murray not been in the same era as the big three, he would've probably become one of if not the all time greatest grand slam champion. But that's the way the cookie crumbles.
It's pretty good of anyone to have won a Mens singles grand slam since 2004 but to win three like Stan and Andy did is also an amazing achievement. I'm not dismissing the undoubted ability of each of the three but it is astonishing that all three of them have pushed the Mens game so hard and high in the same era.I remember someone (McEnroe I think) saying that had Murray not been in the same era as the big three, he would've probably become one of if not the all time greatest grand slam champion. But that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Their individual desire to top trump each other has single handedly dragged the level of the Mens game to greater heights, more especially imho because of their ability to sustain their game over 5 sets. I know it has been done to death about money but I do think the Ladies game would benefit from trialing 5 set games in the Grand Slams. Perhaps give two years notice that it will happen initially for a two year trial but may continue if the game improves and the players take to it. I genuinely think it would help bring up the standard of the womens game.
In his after match press conference Federer is talking like someone close to retirement.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/57756014
Amazing to still even be competitive at close to 40, but the end is no doubt near.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/57756014
Amazing to still even be competitive at close to 40, but the end is no doubt near.
JagLover said:
In his after match press conference Federer is talking like someone close to retirement.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/57756014
Amazing to still even be competitive at close to 40, but the end is no doubt near.
Remarkable someone of his age has remained competitive for so long but watching his matches as Wimbledon this year it's been the first time where I've thought it's been noticeable he's been a bit slower around the court; not much but enough to make a big difference at the top level. I think there's a view the legs are the first thing to go so if Federer's finally reached that point he's not going to be able to cut it in singles any more, at least not if he's wanting to be competitive in the major events.https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/57756014
Amazing to still even be competitive at close to 40, but the end is no doubt near.
As with Murray, I don't see why he'd want to scratch around losing to players who at his best wouldn't have troubled him so I can see him calling time on his singles career in the not too distant future; it will be very strange without him but sadly his glittering career has to end eventually...
Blackpuddin said:
I got £20 on Berrettini at 10/1. Probably an egg on face comment but I've got a very funny feeling something odd is going to happen in the Djoko/Fuscovics match, like a 5-set win for the Hungarian.
Well that was a good prediction 
, still, Berrettini is now 5/1. Hoping that Shapovalov can stop Djoko or tire him out at least.JNW1 said:
Remarkable someone of his age has remained competitive for so long but watching his matches as Wimbledon this year it's been the first time where I've thought it's been noticeable he's been a bit slower around the court; not much but enough to make a big difference at the top level. I think there's a view the legs are the first thing to go so if Federer's finally reached that point he's not going to be able to cut it in singles any more, at least not if he's wanting to be competitive in the major events.
Well, not just this year.He has of course been a little slower in recent years before that. When he had his "resurgence" in 2017 he had found a way to counteract this through taking the ball earlier and cutting rallies even shorter (I saw some interesting analysis of his court positioning for the 2017 Aus open that went into this in depth). That of course is more difficult as he would be taking more balls on the rise. In summary I think it was his ability that allowed him to keep going past his mid thirties and still win grand slams, by allowing him a strategy that overcame increasing physical limitations. There is of course a limit to this though and it looks like 40 is it.
JagLover said:
JNW1 said:
Remarkable someone of his age has remained competitive for so long but watching his matches as Wimbledon this year it's been the first time where I've thought it's been noticeable he's been a bit slower around the court; not much but enough to make a big difference at the top level. I think there's a view the legs are the first thing to go so if Federer's finally reached that point he's not going to be able to cut it in singles any more, at least not if he's wanting to be competitive in the major events.
Well, not just this year.He has of course been a little slower in recent years before that. When he had his "resurgence" in 2017 he had found a way to counteract this through taking the ball earlier and cutting rallies even shorter (I saw some interesting analysis of his court positioning for the 2017 Aus open that went into this in depth). That of course is more difficult as he would be taking more balls on the rise. In summary I think it was his ability that allowed him to keep going past his mid thirties and still win grand slams, by allowing him a strategy that overcame increasing physical limitations. There is of course a limit to this though and it looks like 40 is it.
I agree his natural ability has allowed him to play to a very high level for longer than most but if Wimbledon this year is anything to go by I'm not sure I see him continuing his singles career for much longer. A grass court probably represents his best chance of success so if he's struggling on those where is he going to be really competitive?
McGee_22 said:
Djokovic is quietly and calmly destroying one of the best young in-form Tennis players in the world - he simply has an answer for almost anything.
It's quite amazing to watch isn't it? There is little he hasn't encountered and overcome before. Incredible mind-set and athleticism.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff