nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

French Open 2021

Floppybits

A few days away from the second Slam of the year. I guess for the men's Nadal has to be favourite. Is there anyone that beat him here? As for the ladies for me its wide open with 3 or 4 players that can win. I see Osaka has said she is not doing any press at the French Open for her mental health. I don't see her winning it.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

irelandrover

whiterebel wrote: »

So he's lying?

What? he said she died 5 minutes before he went on court. He didnt say he found out then.

whiterebel

irelandrover wrote: »

What? he said she died 5 minutes before he went on court. He didnt say he found out then.

Every news article is saying he found out before he went on court......I'm wondering which is it?

walshb

josip wrote: »

In fairness to the Nadal supporters, most now acknowledge that Djokovic is at least as good as Nadal.
A few holdout Federer supporters, no longer having the stats to argue with, are retreating behind arguments like 'most natural player', 'greatest ability', 'nicest to watch'.
It's great to read, and I am so enjoying every single one of their posts.
My only worry is that I'll run out of popcorn.
Idemo.

But Fed is the nicest to watch...by far...he is so ahead of anyone in that regard for me..

Greatest tennis talent I have ever seen.

Stats and figures are a separate discussion..

Fed is up there in the top three as regards stats and figures and longevity and records..

But, alone as regards tennis brilliance/talent and skill.

I know it's all if your aunt had balls stuff, but three slam matches that stand out for me that would see Nole and Fed level as regards slams matches are the 2010/2011 U.S. semis that Fed should have finished off, and the 2019 SW19 final that he should have finished off.....

Fed could be on 23 and Nole on 17 had all worked out for Fed....

[Deleted User]

5 minutes before the match Tsitsipas was warming up on the court.

he doesn't say in his post that he knew beforehand and from his demeanour of him during the match I don't think that he knew

as I'd said I thought that he fought all the way to the end and had some great holds and most of the Djokovic breaks were very hard fought

I really believe that the experience will stand to him

when Tsitsipas said after

2 sets don't mean anything, that is what I learned

it sounds really simplistic but it's not really in the case of Djokovic and grand slams

Djokovic is the master of 5 set tennis and the pacing of it

He was able to keep calm and yet again keep believing in himself that he could do it

He's able to keep going both mentally and physically until the end of 5 sets is done if necessary

Whereas others can't do it as well, even if they have a huge lead. Most others would have crumbled also in the face of being 2 behind to come back to win 3 in a row.

Different animal

irelandrover

whiterebel wrote: »

Every news article is saying he found out before he went on court......I'm wondering which is it?

They are all just going on his instagram post but he doesnt actually say he found out before.

MisterAnarchy

glasso wrote: »

Djokovic is a winning machine.

He wins.

He's given up on wanting to be loved by the crowds in the stands or at home watching Tv.

He has his following now and he's focused on winning more GS titles and he's doing ok there

Has even had analytics guys working for him in the past working out the best way to do it.

The ends justifies the means is it ?

I prefer players who win with style.

Getting more Grand Slams than Federer and Nadal does not mean Djokovic is the Goat.

As I previously said I don't think that you can categorically say which player is the Goat, there are too many different variables.
Tennis is a game that has changed dramatically over the years due to advances in technology and science.

There have been huge changes in racket composition and size.
The heads are much larger now, the frames are lighter.
String technology has dramatically changed the game, and handed the advantage to returners and more defensive style players like Djokovic.
Serve and volley is now non existent.

Court surfaces have been slowed down, as has the ball.
Fast indoor courts are long gone.

Grips that would have been unusable on older wooden rackets are now commonplace.

Technique is nowhere near as important as it used to be, the racquets overcome alot of that.
Footwork isnt as important.
Players can take a huge swing at the ball now, with huge racket heads and generate previously impossible spin rates.

Its a whole different ball game.

All of this has played into Djokovics hands and to a slightly lessor extent Nadal.

Federer has had to adapt to these changes mid career.
His game became less aggressive, more conservative, it had to.

Faster courts, a faster ball, gut strings, smaller racquet head , do you honestly think Djokovic gets anywhere near Federer ?

HeidiHeidi

whiterebel wrote: »

So he's lying?

Not to mention that he would have known she was close to the end, even if he didn't know that she'd actually passed away.

What a bizarre comment.

[Deleted User]

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

The ends justifies the means is it ?

I prefer players who win with style.

Getting more Grand Slams than Federer and Nadal does not mean Djokovic is the Goat.

As I previously said I don't think that you can categorically say which player is the Goat, there are too many different variables.
Tennis is a game that has changed dramatically over the years due to advances in technology and science.

There have been huge changes in racket composition and size.
The heads are much larger now, the frames are lighter.
String technology has dramatically changed the game, and handed the advantage to returners and more defensive style players like Djokovic.
Serve and volley is now non existent.

Court surfaces have been slowed down, as has the ball.
Fast indoor courts are long gone.

Grips that would have been unusable on older wooden rackets are now commonplace.

Technique is nowhere near as important as it used to be, the racquets overcome alot of that.
Footwork isnt as important.
Players can take a huge swing at the ball now, with huge racket heads and generate previously impossible spin rates.

Its a whole different ball game.

All of this has played into Djokovics and to a slightly lessor extent Nadal.

Federer has had to adapt to these changes mid career.
His game became less aggressive, more conservative, it had to .

Faster courts, a faster ball, gut strings, smaller racquet head , do you honestly think Djokovic gets anywhere near Federer ?

oh deer.

not these old revisionist history chestnuts from the Fed Fans.... again.

maybe everyone should be playing with wooden rackets with tiny heads and going by boat to New York for the US Open?

things change in the world shocker.

walshb

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Faster courts, a faster ball, gut strings, smaller racquet head , do you honestly think Djokovic gets anywhere near Federer ?

Come on...

These are the type excuses that are so biased...

Nole is an ATG in any era under any conditions...he is a superb tennis player....

He was always a superb player, from 2006 to now

In 2007 or so he beat Federer....he was aged 19/20 at the time.....Fed was 25/26 or so, and closer to his peak that Nole was to his

This talk of "gets anywhere near Federer" is nonsense.....

He has been besting him 14 years now.....the way you are trying to spin this, you'd swear Federer was in his 50s, not late 30s...

MisterAnarchy

walshb wrote: »

Nole is an ATG in any era under any conditions...he is a superb tennis player....

He was always a superb player, from 2006 to now

I didnt say he wasn't.

The point I'm making is that luxilon strings and the courts being slowed down all played into his hands and against Federer.

Why does nobody serve and volley anymore ??

walshb

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

I didnt say he wasn't.

The point I'm making is that luxilon strings and the courts being slowed down all played into his hands and against Federer.

Why does nobody serve and volley anymore ??

Played against Fed and into Nole's hands

How can you actually know this?

Fed was never your typical server and vollyer.....ala Edberg, Sampras, Becker,

[Deleted User]

besides the fact those "demon Luxilon strings" were in tennis well before Federer even won his first grand slam

Kuerten used them in 1997 to win the French Open

but some like to peddle rubbish that Fed was somehow blindsided by them when he started getting owned by Djokovic

Rob2D

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Technique is nowhere near as important as it used to be

Federer has had to adapt to these changes mid career.
His game became less aggressive, more conservative, it had to.

Quite so. Any idiot with a Pure Aero and some poly can play tennis way above their ability nowadays. You see it all the time in clubs. If I could magically change one thing in tennis it would be that everyone is forced to use Dunlop Mayplys forever. The men would be sorted from the boys real quick I can tell you.

People tend to forget that Federer is from a bygone era. He's been around so long he's beaten the 1989 FO champion FFS. Then went to win most of his titles with an old box beam 90 going up against kids swinging Babolats. That's absurd when you've experienced it. He was essentially using a knife in a gunfight most of his career. He completely re-invented himself while the others came into an already modern game.

Fed shouldn't have been able to do what he did at all. Let alone still be here.

josip

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

I didnt say he wasn't.

The point I'm making is that luxilon strings and the courts being slowed down all played into his hands and against Federer.

Why does nobody serve and volley anymore ??

Since when did 4-second, 'serve and volley' points become the be all and end all of tennis?
When I was a kid watching tennis on TV, the highlight of any game/set was a long rally, that the commentators would always draw attention to.
So now a long rally that seriously exerts the players featuring multiple drop shots, lobs and a variety of angles is something bad?

walshb

josip wrote: »

Since when did 4-second, 'serve and volley' points become the be all and end all of tennis?
When I was a kid watching tennis on TV, the highlight of any game/set was a long rally, that the commentators would always draw attention to.
So now a long rally that seriously exerts the players featuring multiple drop shots, lobs and a variety of angles is something bad?

I like the odd serve and volley as much as anyone, but jaysus, far too much is made of it by some....it's quite fooking boring after a while...

The Edbergs and Macs were great, but far too reliant on rushing into the net at any chance....

I'd much prefer some the baseline rallies and back and forth!

[Deleted User]

josip wrote: »

Since when did 4-second, 'serve and volley' points become the be all and end all of tennis?
When I was a kid watching tennis on TV, the highlight of any game/set was a long rally, that the commentators would always draw attention to.
So now a long rally that seriously exerts the players featuring multiple drop shots, lobs and a variety of angles is something bad?

exactly.

well put.

No sport stays the same forever.

They evolve.

Rugby from the 1970's and the rugby played today are completely different. Training methods, things learned from data analytics and AI and nutrition advances etc are all technological changes too.

The type of soccer played is completely different also from a speed and physicality point of view.

Trying to pick and choose conditions or hanker for days long gone forever to rationalise Federer's diminishing record against Djokovic is frankly a little more than mildly pathetic.

Babolat900

There are arguments both in favour and against all three of Fedalovic for being the all time great. It's a subjective argument really though, there's no 100% objective way to answer the question as there are so many variables at play. Different people will have different criteria. How do you even compare Rod Laver against Fedalovic, it's impossible. It's almost like comparing a badminton player because the sport was so different back then.

Regardless, the levels of all three are very similar, each with different styles of course, on any given day either of them could beat each other depending on conditions, form and luck. The Fedalovic rivalry is possibly the greatest threeway rivalry in sporting history. It will be sad to see it all end when they retire.

MisterAnarchy

glasso wrote: »

exactly.

well put.

No sport stays the same forever.

They evolve.

Rugby from the 1970's and the rugby played today are completely different. Training methods, things learned from data analytics and AI and nutrition advances etc are all technological changes too.

The type of soccer played is completely different also from a speed and physicality point of view.

Trying to pick and choose conditions or hanker for days long gone forever to rationalise Federer's diminishing record against Djokovic is frankly a little more than mildly pathetic.

Physicality in modern soccer ? There is none.
You cant tackle anymore.

As for rugby, its all about physicality now.
Huge men, walloping into each other, phase after phase of players repetitively trying to bash their way through.

Give me the older more open rugby any day.

Serve and volley can be boring I agree but variety in any sport is a good thing.
Longer rallies aren't necessarily a better thing, when you have players just hitting the ball back at each other.

A good aggressive well placed shot should be rewarded, alot of the times nowadays it isn't, the returner can get it back.

The courts need to be sped up, aggressive play should be rewarded.

murphyebass

It’s so funny to hear Nadal and Federer fans now change their story to it’s about the “style” etc now and not the stats when they can clearly see ND is going to bypass them both.

Lots of could of and should of’s coming to the fore as well.

Funny stuff.

I like all three for various reasons but ultimately the stats are the stats and it’s looking increasingly likely that ND will come out on top here.

Fed is old
Nadal is closer to ND in age but his body is incredibly broken. Surprised he’s lasted this long tbh.
Which leaves ND who looks to be getting better if anything.
Wouldn’t surprise me one but if he holds all the slams come the end of this year.

Babolat900

murphyebass wrote: »

It’s so funny to hear Nadal and Federer fans now change their story to it’s about the “style” etc now and not the stats when they can clearly see ND is going to bypass them both.

Lots of could of and should of’s coming to the fore as well.

Funny stuff.

I like all three for various reasons but ultimately the stats are the stats and it’s looking increasingly likely that ND will come out on top here.

Fed is old
Nadal is closer to ND in age but his body is incredibly broken. Surprised he’s lasted this long tbh.
Which leaves ND who looks to be getting better if anything.
Wouldn’t surprise me one but if he holds all the slams come the end of this year.

Djokovic is certainly making a stronger and stronger case, especially by overtaking Federer's weeks at number 1 record, if he overtakes the slam record he'd be my pick as the greatest, but for now, I wouldn't give it to him just yet.

walshb

I honestly don't think Nole is better now, or at his best now compared to a few years ago...

He is still superb, just not at his best....he has enough to win a few more slams...

The opposition is just not good enough to really dominate...

[Deleted User]

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Physicality in modern soccer ? There is none.
You cant tackle anymore.

As for rugby, its all about physicality now.
Huge men, walloping into each other, phase after phase of players repetitively trying to bash their way through.

Give me the older more open rugby any day.

Serve and volley can be boring I agree but variety in any sport is a good thing.
Longer rallies aren't necessarily a better thing, when you have players just hitting the ball back at each other.

A good aggressive well placed shot should be rewarded, alot of the times nowadays it isn't, the returner can get it back.

The courts need to be sped up, aggressive play should be rewarded.

you're missing the point is about change - it happens.

you can't turn back the clock

the reason some courts were slowed down a bit was precisely because serve and volley all the time was boring and very one-trick pony. it turned people off actually.

in reality a limited player like Ivanisevic should never be able to win a slam really and that's been the case since.

people want to see rallies and physicality with mobility in tennis and winners are still possible and there are still plenty in matches as there were yesterday where there were lots more winners than errors. and volleys are still in the game - not so much on the clay courts as grass obviously.

murphyebass

Babolat900 wrote: »

Djokovic is certainly making a stronger and stronger case, especially by overtaking Federer's weeks at number 1 record, if he overtakes the slam record he'd be my pick as the greatest, but for now, I wouldn't give it to him just yet.

Fair enough but it’s inevitable.

His mentally is simply amazing. Imagine all your tennis career being basically shunned and told it’s Fed or Nadal for goat.

He’s just bided his time and steadily kept winning.

murphyebass

walshb wrote: »

I honestly don't think Nole is better now, or at his best now compared to a few years ago...

He is still superb, just not at his best....he has enough to win a few more slams...

The opposition is just not good enough to really dominate...

Point is he doesn’t have to be his best to beat the latest crop. He proved that yesterday.

He has the better of both Nadal and Federer and on most days he’ll beat any of the new crop because they’re just not good enough.

Babolat900

Spare a thought for Pete Sampras who thought nobody would beat his slam record when he retired.

[Deleted User]

murphyebass wrote: »

Point is he doesn’t have to be his best to beat the latest crop. He proved that yesterday.

He has the better of both Nadal and Federer and on most days he’ll beat any of the new crop because they’re just not good enough.

Matches over 5 sets suit Djokovic

that's why he's been able to continue winning slams. you don't need to be the best for an entire match.

the mental game and being able to raise your game the longer a match goes on plays into his hands.

If a player can't finish him off in 3 or 4 they are in trouble

he is the master of 5 set tennis

murphyebass

Babolat900 wrote: »

Spare a thought for Pete Sampras who thought nobody would beat his slam record when he retired.

Michael Schumacher recently surpassed by Hamilton too.

Nobody thought that’d happen but here we are unfortunately.

I absolutely can’t stand the guy but there’s no denying the stats.

He’s currently the goat of F1 and will be for a long time to come it seems.

MisterAnarchy

Babolat900 wrote: »

Spare a thought for Pete Sampras who thought nobody would beat his slam record when he retired.

Pete was 31 when he retired but he did have that shoulder injury.

Agassi who seemed to be a real veteran when he retired was only 35.

We have Federer 40, Nadal 35 and Djokovic at 34 still going .

Its a bit mad that players before were finished by 30, some women players were gone by 25!

whiterebel

irelandrover wrote: »

They are all just going on his instagram post but he doesnt actually say he found out before.

We'll probably never find out now. He won't bring it up and the journos will be too embarrassed to check, if that's what happened. For me it would explain his demeanour during the whole match. His expression didn't change from the start through 2-0 up to losing his first FO final. I think twice he gave out, once near the end. For such an emotional guy normally it was very restrained. I would have thought they would have told him to give him the option to pull out.

MisterAnarchy

murphyebass wrote: »

Michael Schumacher recently surpassed by Hamilton too.

Nobody thought that’d happen but here we are unfortunately.

I absolutely can’t stand the guy but there’s no denying the stats.

He’s currently the goat of F1 and will be for a long time to come it seems.

Formula 1 is a joke and has been for the last decade.

Put an old woman into Hamiltons car and she'd win the race.