I am NOT talking about a back court retrieval shot and I never mentioned Venus. Venus cant play the shot well either, but she has a better chance than Dav. who is static!!!
The shot I describe is ATTACKING. Fedex and Serena are the masters. None of the others have the shot as developed. Hingis could do a powder puff version. What you described are scrambling gets...different thing altogether.
I agree with a lot of what you say, but it is not so absolute. Sharapova got overpowered at Wimbledon. At their best, perhaps only Clijsters can hit with the sisters. Hantuchova can do it, but only on the backhand.
I wont even bring up the respect stuff, as its is detracting from the far more interesting tennis material.
Actually the score is decided already by the cogent
>arguments of Pat Cash.<
i was happy to leave it to cash as he's a good champion, but he was undecided until recently
on grass - pistol - the form he was in '93 & '99 was better than any man has played a tourney
best serve, good returns, fantastic forehand & backhand & rallied until he won
feds up against that ?
his return isn't good enough to have broken pistol more than than pistol wouda broken fed's "weaker" serve ( feds' return is good, but it's not agassi class & if agassi hardly broke pistol in his prime, i doubt feds woud have )
this i give to pistol in 4, with maybe a coupla tie-breaks involved
on hard ?
closer, as pistol's serve slightly less effective there than on grass ( but only a fraction ) & feds return has more chance of success ( but only a fraction )
marginally more in favor of fed winning protracted rallies on more consistent court
overall though, peak pistol still has a little too much & what fed has clawed back still won't be enough to give him the win
>The shot I
>describe is ATTACKING. Fedex and Serena are the masters<
don't talk crap
either you're talking a running forehand from the baseline, which is a desperation shot not worth bothering with, or a static, feet planted at the baseline forehand, which is no "magic" shot & like i said davenport, russians & belgians can all play - & all more consistently
>Sharapova got overpowered at Wimbledon<
yeah & serena got overpowered by her the year before with sharapova using the same kinda forehands
Last edited by eldrick on Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
You must know of the "shot" Infama is talking about. Described perfectly - the "cross-court whip". Federer hits winners with it quite regularly. Others have done it on occasion but not with the consistency or remarkable control that RF does. It is not a defensive or desperation shot -it is a pure attack and for the most part impossible to return.
I dont agree, even though your response was well reasoned.
Fed would have put enough pressure on the Sampras serve to cause occasional cracks.
PPs returns would be far from adequate to handle the Fedex serve.
In rallies the PP backhand would be made mincemeat of. He would run over to cover with his forehand, a la FF and would open up the court for Fedex to put him away everytime.
PP had a rising motion with his backnhand...not flat enough and would hit long when pressured with deep, heavy strokes. He really could only hit winners off it with short returns, that he got from his handy serve.
I say Fedex in 4...on a bad day. Otherwise, 3 straight...mixture of 3s and 4s.
Last edited by Infama on Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
You must know of the "shot" Infama is talking about. Described
>perfectly - the "cross-court whip". Federer hits winners with it quite
>regularly. Others have done it on occasion but not with the consistency or
>remarkable control that RF does. It is not a defensive or desperation shot -it
>is a pure attack and for the most part impossible to return.<
that shot, if played from mid-court is a good shot, but plenty of others play it well - not withstanding pistol - agassi & yes, even roddick plays it
the question was about serena: if it's mid-court, the aforementioned davenport, russians & belgians all play it just as well - if it's to describe it from the baseline, from static position, they are still equally adept,
if it's a running shot from the baseline,that is normally a desperation shot, which unfortunately/fortunately serena has had to learn to play in order to keep in a rally, due to her ineptitude at being out-thought & ending up scurrying about
the other galz aren't as adept at this shot, as they have the nuance not to generally get snookered into this undignified position & hence haven't had need to work on it
Last edited by eldrick on Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
>Fed would have put enough pressure on the
>Sampras serve to cause occasional cracks.<
he woudn't have
his return is not on a par with agassi, chang or even becker & if they very infrequently broke him at their peak, he certainly won't stand any better chance
>PPs returns would be far from
>adequate to handle the Fedex serve.<
he broke far better servers in his slams than fed ever did - goran, becker,edberg
if he broke those guyz, he had more than a good enough return to break fed several times
>In rallies the PP backhand would be
>made mincemeat of. He would run over to cover with his forehand, a la FF and
>would open up the court for Fedex to put him away everytime.<
his backhand at worst, is fractionally behind fed's, & may eventually break-down in protracted rallies
the problem for fed is that, pistol was never interested ( even at his peak ) in trading backhands all day - he woud look to get into the net as soon as possible, even if it meant running around onto the forehand or tendency to rush the net
in the end, you don't get protracted back-hand rallies, you get a blur as pistol gets to the net & in a split second fed has to find the instant passing shot/lob winner or pistol has made chopped liver of him with the volley
sure fed will pass/lob him plenty, but if this is happening on fed's serve ( as i expect it to - not too many rallies needed when pistol is serving 2nd serve aces on dime placed at the T ) - there will be break point opportunities - far more than on pistol's serve
>PP had a rising
>motion with his backhand...not flat enough and would hit long when pressured
>with deep, heavy strokes.<
on a clay court at end of 15 - 20 stroke rally
on hard court, he didn't have fed's accuracy, but like i said, even when he coud easily get into backhand duels with someone he coud easily defeat on it, his instinct woud be to get to the net & dominate from there
>He really could only hit winners off it with short
>returns, that he got from his handy serve.<
best ever serve, fool !
>I say Fedex in 4...on a bad day.
>Otherwise, 3 straight...mixture of 3s and 4s.<
you clearly are completely clueless about this game
Reading this back and fourth is really quite interesting. Unfortunately we can never know who is right. I doubt Fed would take Pete straight. It would have been some incredible tennis with two very contrasting players - both who really know the game. If only Pete had been a bit younger - or Fed a bit older. Kind of like Geb and Bek. Damn.
I would have loved to see them play each other at their peaks. Federer and Sampras are probably the best I've seen up to this point in time but the game is changing in an interesting way.
Cyril, maybe you can get your son to start playing tennis if he gets tired of soccer and you can't convince him that track is good:o) He'll have a leg up on everybody because of his foot eye coordination from soccer (McEnroe had it!) and his track ability.
Last edited by cullman on Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Cyril, maybe you can get your son to
>start playing tennis if he gets tired of soccer and you can't convince him that
>track is good:o) He'll have a leg up on everybody because of his foot eye
>coordination from soccer (McEnroe had it!) and his track ability.
Thanks, we have played around a little on the tennis court. I think it may be the best all-round individual sport. But, unfortunately, tennis also has an image problem around here (as I mentioned in the soccer thread track has an image problem too). One of my son's soccer coaches went as far as telling the kids "if you don't want to work hard get off the soccer pitch and go play that sissy sport, tennis". Obviously the guy was a moron, but many of the kids around here think it is a sport for girls or rich sissy boys.
This Jr. High thing is throwing me for a loop. The kids are so influenced by their friends most of whom have been fed a diet of football, baseball and basketball, that getting them to even consider being an individual is next to impossible. At least soccer involves a considerable amount of running and he is very interested in playing the game the right way - not kick and run boom-ball, but controlled possession soccer.
I'll have to wait and see what happens next year when he gets to high school.