It's always to see an injured player coming back and try to retrieve his level before injury or break. Delpotro for instance is doing very well.
BUt personally I woudl have preferred those players to remain healthy and keep their due ranking all along.
In fact I woudl typically not like a comeback where the past champion (let's say Pete) comes back and wins everything again as it woudl mean that we had been looking at a poor competition level game in the meantime.
Imagine Federer taking a year off now and come back in 2014 to win the 4 slams. I'd love it but it woudl just show how poor the competition is/was or simply how special the player is. Though I think he is a special player, I don;t think he is that good.
Regarding Nadal I was always extremely surprised by how well his comeback were. He is in fact the only player I know who comes back stronger from injury than before injury.
I agree there Tenez. Success later in one's career is like a double edged sword by where the feat should be celebrated, though it then asks more probing questions over the quality of the field. It is possible to say that one player is that great that anything he does is impossible for anyone else to replicate. On an un-related subject, I am hoping to upload the recording I did of Roger Federer - Sporting Great on SKy Sports. Keep an eye on V2 I would be interested in your views on a comment Pat Cash made during the programme.
Nadal and Djokovic are almost experiencing the same problem in retaining the top form to dominate at 3 Slams beyond 1 season.
I do like seeing players like Haas, Nalbandian, Davydenko and Stepanek play well into their 30's. In such a period where physical conditioning is paramount is a testament to talent which plays a significant factor in them being able to compete.
On an un-related subject, I am hoping to upload the recording I did of Roger Federer - Sporting Great on SKy Sports. Keep an eye on V2 I would be interested in your views on a comment Pat Cash made during the programme.
------------------------
Will do.
================================
I do like seeing players like Haas, Nalbandian, Davydenko and Stepanek play well into their 30's. In such a period where physical conditioning is paramount is a testament to talent which plays a significant factor in them being able to compete.
------------------------
Completely agree. In fact they only have their talent to make a mark on the tour. I have said many times, one of the strongest era, if not the strongest in shot-making ability was actually the 2002 - 2007 era. Add there, Ljubo, Coria, Blake, peak Agassi etc...They were amazing ball striker and breath of fresh air between the slightly one-D SVers and now the lung-bursting baseliners with average shots.
Read: *between the slightly one-D SVers of the 90s and now the lung-bursting baseliners with average shots.
Ljubicic was one of my favourites. I so wanted him to win a Slam. His BH was just huge and the execution was stunning. I would like to add Malisse. I have always been a big fan of his game. It was the aggression he played with. I find him a joy to watch because he goes for shots no matter the risk factor involved.
The Federer programme is really a good watch. Footage of him developing on Clay, some of his tantrums, his junior success at Wimbledon and also the charity work he does outside the game. Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Nadal, Becker, Sampras all speak very well of him.
The Federer programme is really a good watch. Footage of him developing on Clay, some of his tantrums, his junior success at Wimbledon and also the charity work he does outside the game. Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Nadal, Becker, Sampras all speak very well of him.
-----------------------------
Bizzarely, I am not very sensitive to charity work from top players. It's good they do but as every top player, actress, actor, celeb etc..does it I tend to look at it as part of their job. They are money making machine and not doing anything would affect their image so it is difficult for me to actually assess the genuine part in those charity entreprises and what is the PR machine behind it.
Nothing better than a tennis court and high pressure to see what they really are made off....and Fed is certainly top class in that respect.
He does say that his most nervous match was against Roddick in 2004 at Wimbledon out of all the finals he has played.
Agreed they do have a moral obligation as it were to do what they can for charitable causes. I think what impresses me about Federer was that he took the mantle to be the flag bearer for tennis and what it can do for charity.
He does really cherish all his successes on the court. I think that of all players who have success too. I think the way in which Roger has handled the pressures of successes has been amazing. A genuine love affair of the game and is not too disconcerned with records and his standing in the game.
Certainly. His game is the reason I have become a cyber poster. I don't think I would have been tempted to write about tennis without his amazing game.
When facing the opposition most see Ws and Ls...others enjoyed much more.
His most impressive win in my view was his semi final v Agassi at the USO under stormy conds in 2004. Sure Agassi was aging but how could he find the calm to find his A game under such a delirious crowd? He was calm like high altitude alpine lake in the middle of a NY hurrican. Stunning especially as he had still little experience at that time.
My favourite Federer match was the US Open 2005 Final. I don't think I had seen the crowd so whipped into a frenzy since the Sampras/Agassi final in 2002. Agassi had played a stunning tournament and Federer's tennis was right at it's peak and he could've hit anyone off the court in that phase.
Federer without question is the greatest talent to grace a court. I remember in the beginning of his career and those BH passes down DTL and it was ridiculous seeing someone hit with such ease on a vertical basis. I remember Lendl, Edberg, Agassi and Courier having some mighty BH's, but nothing like that.
I became a cyber poster just after Murray burst onto the scene. I do think the quality of tennis nowadays is hit and miss. I remember just watching Djokovic and Seppi this week and the first set was a joke. Djokovic was so loose and was just throwing junk across the net.
Tennis players nowadays play with much less margin for error. I love watching Tsonga or Youzhny who just out with attitude of playing in a particular way and sod the result.
Tennis players nowadays play with much less margin for error.
============================
Are you sure? What makes you think that? The string technology actually allows for considerable more margins.
Sorry I meant they played a game with less margin for error. Example they won't pull the trigger during rallies in fear of going long or wide or into the net.
Indeed. This fear is justified by the fact that the conds are so slow that the risk is not the price as chances are the ball will come back anyway. As they say they have to hit 4 winners in a row to score a point.
Nadal's best describe the situation in his book I believe: "why go for a 60% winner now when 3 or 5 shots later that percentage may increase to 85%?" (or something like that.
What he doesn;t say however is that it's his opponent who's trying to pull the winners most of the time and their chance go from 45% to 5% as the rally goes on....and even smaller as the match goes on.
Certainly the Boletelli effect in tennis. I know it sounds extreme but you can even credit the guy for coaching such a style as he could certainly see where the future of the game was headed before most. He certainly moulded his players in a Wilander/Lendl way by where they are able to sit back on the baseline and remain in rallies.
I think as well credit needs to go to Rafa who is honest enough to admit that his style requires something from the opponent eg. To have the opponent spend so much energy in rallies. Players are now seeing that there is much more reward to play in a Nadal style than say of a Federer. The thing with Nadal he is able to generate so much spin from the strings and his technique. Murray has certainly utilised the Nadal styled FH in prolonging rallies.
I can't wait for the Federer Autobiography
Baltacha coming back after back surgery and diagnosis of terminal liver disease (she has to take 100 pills a week just to get out of bed) is an inspirational one for me.
Nice article and I agree with what you are saying OP!
Yes watching players make comebacks is now more interesting than watching say Federer and Djokovic win every match they play and even Nadal winning though I am a massive fan of Rafa!
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Comeback's - More Interesting Than Success?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 17/8/12
It's always to see an injured player coming back and try to retrieve his level before injury or break. Delpotro for instance is doing very well.
BUt personally I woudl have preferred those players to remain healthy and keep their due ranking all along.
In fact I woudl typically not like a comeback where the past champion (let's say Pete) comes back and wins everything again as it woudl mean that we had been looking at a poor competition level game in the meantime.
Imagine Federer taking a year off now and come back in 2014 to win the 4 slams. I'd love it but it woudl just show how poor the competition is/was or simply how special the player is. Though I think he is a special player, I don;t think he is that good.
Regarding Nadal I was always extremely surprised by how well his comeback were. He is in fact the only player I know who comes back stronger from injury than before injury.
posted on 17/8/12
I agree there Tenez. Success later in one's career is like a double edged sword by where the feat should be celebrated, though it then asks more probing questions over the quality of the field. It is possible to say that one player is that great that anything he does is impossible for anyone else to replicate. On an un-related subject, I am hoping to upload the recording I did of Roger Federer - Sporting Great on SKy Sports. Keep an eye on V2 I would be interested in your views on a comment Pat Cash made during the programme.
Nadal and Djokovic are almost experiencing the same problem in retaining the top form to dominate at 3 Slams beyond 1 season.
I do like seeing players like Haas, Nalbandian, Davydenko and Stepanek play well into their 30's. In such a period where physical conditioning is paramount is a testament to talent which plays a significant factor in them being able to compete.
posted on 17/8/12
On an un-related subject, I am hoping to upload the recording I did of Roger Federer - Sporting Great on SKy Sports. Keep an eye on V2 I would be interested in your views on a comment Pat Cash made during the programme.
------------------------
Will do.
================================
I do like seeing players like Haas, Nalbandian, Davydenko and Stepanek play well into their 30's. In such a period where physical conditioning is paramount is a testament to talent which plays a significant factor in them being able to compete.
------------------------
Completely agree. In fact they only have their talent to make a mark on the tour. I have said many times, one of the strongest era, if not the strongest in shot-making ability was actually the 2002 - 2007 era. Add there, Ljubo, Coria, Blake, peak Agassi etc...They were amazing ball striker and breath of fresh air between the slightly one-D SVers and now the lung-bursting baseliners with average shots.
posted on 17/8/12
Read: *between the slightly one-D SVers of the 90s and now the lung-bursting baseliners with average shots.
posted on 17/8/12
Ljubicic was one of my favourites. I so wanted him to win a Slam. His BH was just huge and the execution was stunning. I would like to add Malisse. I have always been a big fan of his game. It was the aggression he played with. I find him a joy to watch because he goes for shots no matter the risk factor involved.
The Federer programme is really a good watch. Footage of him developing on Clay, some of his tantrums, his junior success at Wimbledon and also the charity work he does outside the game. Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Nadal, Becker, Sampras all speak very well of him.
posted on 17/8/12
The Federer programme is really a good watch. Footage of him developing on Clay, some of his tantrums, his junior success at Wimbledon and also the charity work he does outside the game. Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Nadal, Becker, Sampras all speak very well of him.
-----------------------------
Bizzarely, I am not very sensitive to charity work from top players. It's good they do but as every top player, actress, actor, celeb etc..does it I tend to look at it as part of their job. They are money making machine and not doing anything would affect their image so it is difficult for me to actually assess the genuine part in those charity entreprises and what is the PR machine behind it.
Nothing better than a tennis court and high pressure to see what they really are made off....and Fed is certainly top class in that respect.
posted on 17/8/12
He does say that his most nervous match was against Roddick in 2004 at Wimbledon out of all the finals he has played.
Agreed they do have a moral obligation as it were to do what they can for charitable causes. I think what impresses me about Federer was that he took the mantle to be the flag bearer for tennis and what it can do for charity.
He does really cherish all his successes on the court. I think that of all players who have success too. I think the way in which Roger has handled the pressures of successes has been amazing. A genuine love affair of the game and is not too disconcerned with records and his standing in the game.
posted on 17/8/12
Certainly. His game is the reason I have become a cyber poster. I don't think I would have been tempted to write about tennis without his amazing game.
When facing the opposition most see Ws and Ls...others enjoyed much more.
His most impressive win in my view was his semi final v Agassi at the USO under stormy conds in 2004. Sure Agassi was aging but how could he find the calm to find his A game under such a delirious crowd? He was calm like high altitude alpine lake in the middle of a NY hurrican. Stunning especially as he had still little experience at that time.
posted on 17/8/12
My favourite Federer match was the US Open 2005 Final. I don't think I had seen the crowd so whipped into a frenzy since the Sampras/Agassi final in 2002. Agassi had played a stunning tournament and Federer's tennis was right at it's peak and he could've hit anyone off the court in that phase.
Federer without question is the greatest talent to grace a court. I remember in the beginning of his career and those BH passes down DTL and it was ridiculous seeing someone hit with such ease on a vertical basis. I remember Lendl, Edberg, Agassi and Courier having some mighty BH's, but nothing like that.
I became a cyber poster just after Murray burst onto the scene. I do think the quality of tennis nowadays is hit and miss. I remember just watching Djokovic and Seppi this week and the first set was a joke. Djokovic was so loose and was just throwing junk across the net.
Tennis players nowadays play with much less margin for error. I love watching Tsonga or Youzhny who just out with attitude of playing in a particular way and sod the result.
posted on 17/8/12
Tennis players nowadays play with much less margin for error.
============================
Are you sure? What makes you think that? The string technology actually allows for considerable more margins.
posted on 17/8/12
Sorry I meant they played a game with less margin for error. Example they won't pull the trigger during rallies in fear of going long or wide or into the net.
posted on 17/8/12
Indeed. This fear is justified by the fact that the conds are so slow that the risk is not the price as chances are the ball will come back anyway. As they say they have to hit 4 winners in a row to score a point.
Nadal's best describe the situation in his book I believe: "why go for a 60% winner now when 3 or 5 shots later that percentage may increase to 85%?" (or something like that.
What he doesn;t say however is that it's his opponent who's trying to pull the winners most of the time and their chance go from 45% to 5% as the rally goes on....and even smaller as the match goes on.
posted on 17/8/12
Certainly the Boletelli effect in tennis. I know it sounds extreme but you can even credit the guy for coaching such a style as he could certainly see where the future of the game was headed before most. He certainly moulded his players in a Wilander/Lendl way by where they are able to sit back on the baseline and remain in rallies.
I think as well credit needs to go to Rafa who is honest enough to admit that his style requires something from the opponent eg. To have the opponent spend so much energy in rallies. Players are now seeing that there is much more reward to play in a Nadal style than say of a Federer. The thing with Nadal he is able to generate so much spin from the strings and his technique. Murray has certainly utilised the Nadal styled FH in prolonging rallies.
I can't wait for the Federer Autobiography
posted on 17/8/12
Baltacha coming back after back surgery and diagnosis of terminal liver disease (she has to take 100 pills a week just to get out of bed) is an inspirational one for me.
posted on 17/8/12
Nice article and I agree with what you are saying OP!
Yes watching players make comebacks is now more interesting than watching say Federer and Djokovic win every match they play and even Nadal winning though I am a massive fan of Rafa!
Page 1 of 1