Wishing for more...

[djarvik]

Anyone else has a feeling of "wishing for more" after the Semi and Final of Australian Open? Not in a sense of more points played, more time spent on the court but in a sense of more "game". Not that Rafa, Nole or Andy dont have "game", but rather their style is extremely similar. I feel like I am watching a really good, Oscar worthy movie for...ehh...about 10th time now.

Sure it is a fantastic picture, a work of art no less, but I can only take so much of the same thing. Even if this thing is really good. The best parts of these matches as of late for me was a few points here and there, mostly in decisive moments, but the rest of it was a well planned, played out match that is quite predictable and repetitive.

Sure the courts changed, so did the equipment, the game evolved. But it looks to me that this evolution led to a rather predictable outcome of the matches. Upsets are rare now and usually injury driven, rather then style incompatibility. Everyone "looks up" to the most successful players and to a degree tries to copy them, their regiments, their "winning ways".

I feel like with Federer's departure, the variety in today's tour will take a huge dip. Most of the other players seem to play a similar brand of tennis. Sure, some have slightly better backhands, some have slightly better serves and so on, but they are essentially same type of players playing the same type of game.

It seems the formula for success in today's game is: to start out as a pusher with good fitness and speed, young, then start adding power and build confidence. Gone are the days of players who build their game around attacking the net, gone are the days when a player who is taking risks more then his opponent can be successful on a regular basis.

A player that comes 10 times a match to finish points at the net suddenly considered to be an All-Court player. A player that has fundamentally solid strokes with medium power is suddenly a Hard Court specialist and what ever happened with a Grass Court specialists?

Wishing for more variety here...we have plenty of "characters" on the tour now, but the game itself can use some character, something different. The drama should be not the only reason to watch the grueling matches now, in which both players give their all physically.

Find your own way to win matches, find your strategy, outside of a simple "hit to a weaker side and wait for error", develop something unique. Tennis has turned into a sport in which physical talent of a participants take presidents over any other talents.

Congrats to Novak, he really is the best player at the moment. I just hope there are players out there that can find "their" own way to deal with him and not give up before the match started. Much like in boxing, he won many matches (and will win this year) without hitting one ball, purely on reputation, purely because opponent thinks "he does what I do, just better...."

My 2c.

[ILuvBillVal]

I agree. For me personally I find more enjoyment watching the matches that are lower profile. The players are a little more interesting even if not as technically sound.

[Vieira151]

We still have Stepanek. He won a doubles GS the other day. He is our only hope!

Also, Dolgo and Dimitrov for the future. Hopefully Raonic develops into a good Grass Court player.

Also, Grass Court players aren't so prominant these days, because the season is about a month long.

Tsonga I always find fun to watch. He likes to get into interesting rallies, with a lot of funny little drop shots and net play. Shame he doesn't do those more often.

Trying to think of more interesting players, but can't think of many. Here's hoping Nishikori turns out to be a "fun" player as well.

[ILuvBillVal]

I found Nishikori fun to watch even if he's a little flat sometimes. Once Murray beat him I lost my desire to watch the AO.

[Rocketsfall]

I noticed how the AO became uninteresting for me from the QF onwards. From then on the outcomes are predictable. And what is even worse: how the matches evolve is predictable as well.
You have the big four, with three and four not being able to beat one and two, and with two not being able to beat one.

[Corbon]

Nadal winning against Federer, Nole winning against Nadal and Murray not winning anything. Exactly what the doctor ordered.

Yes two matches were close but in the end there were no surprises and the dominance of the top quartet (in the "correct" order) continues.

Already looking forward to the French Open because of the much more convenient time zone.

[Corbon]

And I don't see Federer ever winning a Slam again. He's basically the epitome and the end of an era of all court players who could actually play a great one-handed backhand.

Sure there's a Tsonga I really enjoy to watch because of his at times unconventional game and there's also a Monfils who reminds me of Yannick Noah, with his spectacular game and very outgoing personality. But I don't see either of them hitting big in Slams.

Like Lendl once said, it doesn't matter whether you win 75 small tournaments or more, it only matters how well you fare at Grand Slam tournaments. These are the ultimate tests in the sport and this is where you will be remembered. Being a No. 1 player is only a temporary affair. But no one can take away your GS win. (I'm sure Wozniacki would agree).

[SlicerITST]

What happened to grass court specialists? Well, you can play 3 (realistically 2 though) bigger tournaments a year. So what would be the point of specializing in it?

[NARCOSIS2009]

I always find debates like this intriguing, whether its which players better, or the style of the game etc.

Tennis is a physical sport, its alot more physical than it has ever been - I do believe we are in the greatest era in tennis, Also it is natural for a sport to develop, players will become better technically and mentally than ever before as time goes on, in 50 years time the game will most likely only be played 1 way with very little variation, as it is at the moment just alot more similar - For example a Formula 1 car is designed and built to the purpose it is needed for, to be the best at what it does, you dont see other formula 1 cars drastically different in design, its a small amount of difference between cars, as will it be in 50 or however many years time for players.

What I'm trying to say is the game is on a slope to physical and technical perfection, its natural that if playing at the net is not practical, then why do it if it will result in a loss.

Also I think for the people that wish for change (Djarvik), You need to get rid of that idea , because the game is just going to get more similar, will eventually come to a point where it will look like 2 robots playing one another

Borg, Mcenroe, Conners, Roger Federer and now the current players are just a progression to perfection.

I mean Roger modelled his forehand technique on Borgs, as has Dimitrov modelled his on Rogers, its only natural the technical side of it gets better and better, and therefore the shots get better and better.

Roger might be the best player to have played the sport just now, might have the most beautiful game to have ever been witnessed, but put him up against someone from 50-100 years time in the future (even using the same equipment), You will find that he will beaten easily by a better more perfected technique, and footwork players, and all the other aspects needed (volleying will prolly be extremely rare lol).

PS Djarvik what I'm saying is if you think its bad now, maybe you should consider changing sports, cause you'll find you'll complain more and more as time goes on , or you should just accept it and enjoy what we have now

[djarvik]

I didn't say I am looking for change, I didn't say it's bad, and I am not complaining. Thanks for atributing these to me so you can drive your opinion through. These are my observation, of the tour today and the sport in general, including the very begging levels of it, kids. I want more, not less.

There is also nothing to accept for me, and less to enjoy, with very year. Sadly. Until the dynamic of the tour changes, it will be a rather one dimensional few years ahead, until the new trend and talent pool develops.

[Rocketsfall]

I'm still enjoying the variety that players bring ranked below the top 4. Matches like Wawrinka - Baghdatis, Isner - Nalbandian, Hewitt - Raonic at this years AO where very nice to watch because of the unpredictable outcome, clash of styles,...
Unfortunatly from the QF onwards you know who is going to win and you know what the match is going to look like. Ok it might be a 5h grueling battle with unbelievable rallies but you just know that it is going to happen.

[VMoe86]

Since Narcosis brought up the Formula 1: There you have different rules every couple of years to prevent the "perfect" Formula 1 car or last year the new Pirelli tyres and the DRS system. Still the styles of the top drives are varied and the different courses suited some cars better, some worse. I remember the "glorious" days when Ferrari and Schumacher dominated, because they had the "perfect" car. It was utterly boring.

These days in tennis, almost everything is homogenised. The courts all play too similarly on: Slow to medium pace with medium bounce and rather heavy balls is the standard. A certain style is suited very well for these conditions.

You can play one style and win everywhere, that's why we have seen two career grand slams in the recent time and that's why Djokovic will most likely join Federer and Nadal to this club.

I'd like to see varied court speeds, varied bounces and varied balls (changing from tournament to tournament). This way players have to adapt, have to be more versatile and on courts like the Paris Masters in 2010 (they've slowed it down again in 2011 ) you will see serve and volley being a successful tactic.

[Tamthewasp]

Yeah, A lot has been said. I would like the courts all too be very different. With grass going back to what it should be super fast,very low bounce.

Young tennis players just want 2 emulate their heroes it's natural. Although the serve and volley play will come back in a big way soon. I have my reasons why I think this


Maybe it would be good if the ball was a little smaller and say lighter/heavier. The tennis bats tweaked a little, say less torque or something.

Something has 2 be done in order for variety too happen.

I think next 10 years we will have an out and out serve n volley gs champ then a few more serve n volleyer players might appear.

Tam.

[Rob ITST]

Tennis bats?

I hope you're right about the serve and volleyers though.

[L Sanchez MD]

Anyone else has a feeling of "wishing for more" after the Semi and Final of Australian Open? Not in a sense of more points played, more time spent on the court but in a sense of more "game". Not that Rafa, Nole or Andy dont have "game", but rather their style is extremely similar. I feel like I am watching a really good, Oscar worthy movie for...ehh...about 10th time now.

Sure it is a fantastic picture, a work of art no less, but I can only take so much of the same thing. Even if this thing is really good. The best parts of these matches as of late for me was a few points here and there, mostly in decisive moments, but the rest of it was a well planned, played out match that is quite predictable and repetitive.

Sure the courts changed, so did the equipment, the game evolved. But it looks to me that this evolution led to a rather predictable outcome of the matches. Upsets are rare now and usually injury driven, rather then style incompatibility. Everyone "looks up" to the most successful players and to a degree tries to copy them, their regiments, their "winning ways".

I feel like with Federer's departure, the variety in today's tour will take a huge dip. Most of the other players seem to play a similar brand of tennis. Sure, some have slightly better backhands, some have slightly better serves and so on, but they are essentially same type of players playing the same type of game.

It seems the formula for success in today's game is: to start out as a pusher with good fitness and speed, young, then start adding power and build confidence. Gone are the days of players who build their game around attacking the net, gone are the days when a player who is taking risks more then his opponent can be successful on a regular basis.

A player that comes 10 times a match to finish points at the net suddenly considered to be an All-Court player. A player that has fundamentally solid strokes with medium power is suddenly a Hard Court specialist and what ever happened with a Grass Court specialists?

Wishing for more variety here...we have plenty of "characters" on the tour now, but the game itself can use some character, something different. The drama should be not the only reason to watch the grueling matches now, in which both players give their all physically.

Find your own way to win matches, find your strategy, outside of a simple "hit to a weaker side and wait for error", develop something unique. Tennis has turned into a sport in which physical talent of a participants take presidents over any other talents.

Congrats to Novak, he really is the best player at the moment. I just hope there are players out there that can find "their" own way to deal with him and not give up before the match started. Much like in boxing, he won many matches (and will win this year) without hitting one ball, purely on reputation, purely because opponent thinks "he does what I do, just better...."

My 2c.

I agree with you more than words can say.

I'm only happy that people like Dolgopolov and Tomic can even make a breakthrough at all. I will be supporting them in years to come. (I really dislike Tomic, but his game is just way more interesting that most.)