"Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction" - Page 3 - TennisForum.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #31 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 09:04 PM
Senior Member
 
adner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,598
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Actually, Aga keeps saying that Li returns a lot of balls and is very consistent ball striker. Maybe we see a different picture through TV?
adner is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 10:02 PM
MA5HA
 
Craig.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 33,793
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

When Li's playing well, she constructs points beautifully.
Craig. is offline  
post #33 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 10:14 PM
Senior Member
 
timafi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,469
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"


Melania Trump might very well be the first semi-literate AND vapid First Lady of the US
timafi is offline  
post #34 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 10:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 15,793
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by BH both wings View Post
There is some (little) truth in that statement. Li's success is about point construction, not pure power. "Touch" however is not the first term coming to mind. She is playing 31K tension strings, heaviest next to Ljubicic and still spraying like a sprinkler.
Yup. Ironic that TF embarrass themselves again by mocking this person for making a very accurate statement (even if, by the looks of his other comments, he made that one accurate statement by accident).

It really amazes me that people who watch so much tennis can still be under the impression that Li is an uber-ballbasher. Do they really watch her matches and genuinely think that she's hitting shots as hard as Kvitova for example does?

Last edited by dsanders06; Jan 21st, 2013 at 10:22 PM.
dsanders06 is offline  
post #35 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 10:34 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 27,034
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsanders06 View Post
Yup. Ironic that TF embarrass themselves again by mocking this person for making a very accurate statement (even if, by the looks of his other comments, he made that one accurate statement by accident).

It really amazes me that people who watch so much tennis can still be under the impression that Li is an uber-ballbasher. Do they really watch her matches and genuinely think that she's hitting shots as hard as Kvitova for example does?
Let´s see what you have to say about that in three hours.

You don´t need to be a mad ballbasher to have average point construction. For example take her matches against Radwanska last year. She destroyed Radwanska, but she didn´t hit with much margin for error. It´s not that she strategically outplayed Radwanska with a bullet-proof gameplan. She just couldn´t miss and it was breathtaking to watch. She absolutely destroyed Radwanska, but if she is slightly off the exact same strategy results in a loss like it did in Sydney. If Na Li had great point construction and consistency in her hitting, she´d rape Radwanska every time. If Na Li plays 80% she loses to Radwanska. If Azarenka plays 80% she still wins.

- Caroline Wozniacki has never beaten a reigning world #1.
- Caroline Wozniacki has never beaten a top 5 player at a major.
- Caroline Wozniacki has not beaten a top 3 player en route to any of her 23 titles.
- Caroline Wozniacki has beaten two top 5 players en route to her 23 titles (#4 Zvonareva and #5 Schiavone)

-Her fans think she had very bad luck with her Grand Slam and Regular Tour draws.
Patrick345 is offline  
post #36 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 10:37 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,492
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick345 View Post
Let´s see what you have to say about that in three hours.

You don´t need to be a mad ballbasher to have average point construction. For example take her matches against Radwanska last year. She destroyed Radwanska, but she didn´t hit with much margin for error. It´s not that she strategically outplayed Radwanska with a bullet-proof gameplan. She just couldn´t miss and it was breathtaking to watch. She absolutely destroyed Radwanska, but if she is slightly off the exact same strategy results in a loss like it did in Sydney. If Na Li had great point construction and consistency in her hitting, she´d rape Radwanska every time. If Na Li plays 80% she loses to Radwanska. If Azarenka plays 80% she still wins.
Agatha was unwell and not in form in any of those matches.

JarkaFish is offline  
post #37 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 10:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 15,793
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick345 View Post
Let´s see what you have to say about that in three hours.

You don´t need to be a mad ballbasher to have average point construction. For example take her matches against Radwanska last year. She destroyed Radwanska, but she didn´t hit with much margin for error. It´s not that she strategically outplayed Radwanska with a bullet-proof gameplan. She just couldn´t miss and it was breathtaking to watch. She absolutely destroyed Radwanska, but if she is slightly off the exact same strategy results in a loss like it did in Sydney. If Na Li had great point construction and consistency in her hitting, she´d rape Radwanska every time. If Na Li plays 80% she loses to Radwanska. If Azarenka plays 80% she still wins.
I don't actually disagree with MOST of this, there's no denying that Li is inconsistent. But the point is, people on this board often make the mistake of thinking a player's consistency is directly related to how aggressive they are, when that is not necessarily the case at all -- Clijsters is living proof of that, in her second career there was a huge gulf between her best form and her worst form, but no-one would describe her as an out-and-out first-strike ballbasher.

Where I disagree with you is on your description of her beatdown wins over Radwanska last year. In those wins, Na WAS generally winning the points in medium-length rallies (many went to 8+ shots), and she generally was constructing the point, outmanouevring Radwanska, and going for the winner only when Radwanska was out of position and Na had room to smack away a down-the-line backhand or something. She definitely wasn't looking for a winner right from the first shot of a rally, typically. Imo, the reason for her shitfests is more because her footwork and concentration are liable to go AWOL, rather than her strokes or her strategy being incredibly aggressive.
dsanders06 is offline  
post #38 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 21st, 2013, 11:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Serenita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ►▼◄
Posts: 30,201
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

I love Na but this too much....

SERENA
22
Serenita is offline  
post #39 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 22nd, 2013, 12:45 AM
Serena's #1 Hater
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 19,717
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenis Srbija View Post
She/he has a point. You actually don't.
Actually, "pov" does have a point, but when he wears a hat, you can't see it.

"He who finds a wife finds a good thing, and obtains favor from the Lord." -- Proverbs 18:22

"Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard." -- Herb Brooks

"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." -- Muhammad Ali
darrinbaker00 is offline  
post #40 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 22nd, 2013, 12:51 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

As weak as Aga appears, Li Na could still self-destruct and let Aga in the match
tennislover22 is offline  
post #41 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 22nd, 2013, 01:06 AM
Senior Member
 
Boxuan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 950
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick345 View Post
The German ES commentator said something similar during the Görges match, that Na Li is not the most powerful, but known for her consistency. I guess that´s what watching too much Görges, Lisicki and Barthel can do to you. Na Li suddenly looks consistent and underpowered.
Can you blame him? VS Goerges is the only match so far Na has less UEs than her opponent.


·┏┻━┓┏━━━┓┏━━━┓┏━━━┓┏━━━┓┏━━━┓
┏┛李娜┣┫·科娃┣┫·郑洁┣┫·伊万┣┫·彭帅┣┫·杨科┃
┗◎━◎┛┗◎━◎┛┗◎━◎┛┗◎━◎┛┗◎━◎┛┗◎━◎┛
Boxuan is offline  
post #42 of 42 (permalink) Old Jan 22nd, 2013, 01:14 AM
Senior Member
 
n1_and_uh_noone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,394
                     
Re: "Li Na is renowned for her touch and point construction"

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsanders06 View Post
I don't actually disagree with MOST of this, there's no denying that Li is inconsistent. But the point is, people on this board often make the mistake of thinking a player's consistency is directly related to how aggressive they are, when that is not necessarily the case at all -- Clijsters is living proof of that, in her second career there was a huge gulf between her best form and her worst form, but no-one would describe her as an out-and-out first-strike ballbasher.

Where I disagree with you is on your description of her beatdown wins over Radwanska last year. In those wins, Na WAS generally winning the points in medium-length rallies (many went to 8+ shots), and she generally was constructing the point, outmanouevring Radwanska, and going for the winner only when Radwanska was out of position and Na had room to smack away a down-the-line backhand or something. She definitely wasn't looking for a winner right from the first shot of a rally, typically. Imo, the reason for her shitfests is more because her footwork and concentration are liable to go AWOL, rather than her strokes or her strategy being incredibly aggressive.
Li Na is considered a ballbasher because she hits clean winners but people overlook the reasons for this. It is not just sheer pace like Sharapova or a Williams. I have seen lots of matches where the stats of groundstroke speeds showed Li's shots were consistently 5-10 MPH slower than the heavier hitter. However, she takes the ball early and hits flat, 2 things that instantly cut down recovery time.

Concentration is her liability, because IMO she has great footwork and timing. However, she often has a more aggressive mindset than she needs to end points, her average rally ball is already a bit more effective than many other players for the reasons I stated above. She showed in many rallies today that she can rally with Agatha till the cows come home and still strike an easy winner (of course if Agatha used her renowned thinking powers, she would see through the strategy and yank Li out of position, which is when she pretends nothing happened and go for her shots anyway).
n1_and_uh_noone is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome