PDA

View Full Version : Hingis says tour much faster than in 1997


Volcana
Oct 16th, 2002, 05:15 PM
Hingis says tour much faster thanin 1997 (http://********************/commentary_MH_101102.html) (paragraph 11)

"It was slower," Hingis said of the sport in 1997. "You had more time to think where you gonna hit the shot. Today you have to react so fast, it's so much speedier. Sometimes it's like, 'Okay, wait a minute. I need to think where I'm gonna hit the next shot.' Sometimes you just got to hit it back fast, that's the difference. You don't even think sometimes, just hit it back as hard and fast as you can, give the opponents less time."


I've been saying that for some time. It's speed, not power that's the defining issue on the tour. A lot of players hit hard. Only some run fast enough to catch up to the hard shots. Look at the current top five. They are all runners, not just hitters. Power takes away time from the opponent. Speed gives time to you.

ot1962
Oct 16th, 2002, 05:58 PM
So one has to think FAST!!!

Interesting. She said she needed more time to THINK? She must be a SLOW Thinker then!!
There we have it, Martina is a SLOW THINKER.
And we know what happens in school with SLOW THINKERS...They never finish their exams, thus, doesn't do well;)

Effectively, Venus and Serena are at a whole higher level in thinking. I mean, imagine hitting the ball so fast and controlling points at the same time as keeping the ball in play. It must be very tough in a "FAST" kinda way!! Too fast for Martina. I admire Martina for her candidness. I hope her fans would take heed, after all, the words are coming from the great "SLOW" thinker;)

Seriously, i hope she comes back in a better frame of mind and ready to compete.

Volcana
Oct 16th, 2002, 06:12 PM
ot1962 - Venus is my favorite player, but the comparison you make isn't fair. When you're in contorl of the point, you can start thinking about your next shot right after you hit the last one. When you're not in control of the point, you don't get to start thinking about your shot til til after the opponent hits the ball.

Martina does not hit with great pace, AND she isn't fast. (Not to say she SLOW, just 'not fast') Even when she's in control of a point, an opponent who's both fast and powerful can take that control away from her. Martina doesn't really have a way to take control back.

In 1997, the game was angles, Now its about time. How could Demetieva beat her two weeks ago. Rally, line up her forehand and detonate. Right now, Martina could m no more run down that shot than Conchi. However, the simple truth is, Martina cut her rehab short, didn't lkisten to her doctors, and found out the hard way she's not ready to be a top five player.

Yet.

ot1962
Oct 16th, 2002, 06:24 PM
Okay, let me make it fairer...
Venus does hit big shots when on the defensive. That's fast thinking to me!

Volcana, SLOW means NOT FAST. A slow person is someone who is not fast.
Some meanings from the dictionary: not swift; not quick in motion; not rapid;moderate;

I think the game now is about both TIME and ANGLES (ala Serena).
I think my compararison is fair because the Williams are not just Strong and Fast(physically), they are mentally FAST as well.

Volcana
Oct 16th, 2002, 06:46 PM
Well, it was Martina herself saying sometimes she doesn't have time to think.

ot1962
Oct 17th, 2002, 12:14 AM
Yep, from the horses own mouth!
Unless she meant her mind is fully pre-occupied with other more important things:confused: (Sergio comes to mind:) )

jojoseph
Oct 17th, 2002, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by ot1962
So one has to think FAST!!!

Interesting. She said she needed more time to THINK? She must be a SLOW Thinker then!!
There we have it, Martina is a SLOW THINKER.
And we know what happens in school with SLOW THINKERS...They never finish their exams, thus, doesn't do well;)

Effectively, Venus and Serena are at a whole higher level in thinking. I mean, imagine hitting the ball so fast and controlling points at the same time as keeping the ball in play. It must be very tough in a "FAST" kinda way!! Too fast for Martina. I admire Martina for her candidness. I hope her fans would take heed, after all, the words are coming from the great "SLOW" thinker;)

Seriously, i hope she comes back in a better frame of mind and ready to compete.

I don't understand your logic.

Hingis said the game was faster, hence giving the players less time to think in between shots.

For example, if before, it took 2 seconds to think about where to hit the ball, and now, the speed of the game has gotten faster to where you have 1.5 seconds to think about where to hit the ball, then by definition, you have less time to think.

At no point, does she imply anything about being a slow thinker. Just because the game has gotten faster, doesn't mean that she's a slow thinker, IMO. I take it, that that's your personal opinion, though.

Originally posted by ot1962

Volcana, SLOW means NOT FAST. A slow person is someone who is not fast.
Some meanings from the dictionary: not swift; not quick in motion; not rapid;moderate;


actually, Volcana said "not fast".

Think about it, "slow" encompasses "not fast" because when you're slow, you are obviously "not fast". However, "not fast", does not necessarily encompass "slow", as even if you're average speed, you are "not fast", as well as "not slow" as well. Therefore, when she said "not fast", she did not imply "slow". In fact, she made that clear.

Also, when Volcana said that Martina sometimes says sometimes she doesn't have time to think, that doesn't necessarily mean that Martina is a slow thinker. That could just mean, once again, that she's saying that the game has gotten a lot faster, which it has. I still don't get why you said "from the horses mouth". And Volcana didn't appear to be agreeing with you.

The thing about competition, generally speaking of course, is that things are usually gonna get better as time passes.

In the end, the Williams sisters have just gotten so much more powerful and make such fewer mistakes on the court now, that, like Marti said, you don't have much time to think in between points.

Volcana
Oct 17th, 2002, 04:24 AM
jojoseph - Thanx. You helped clear up my arguement. I think Martina used to be just fast enough. With two ankle surgeries and not enough rehab, she just can't pick 'em up and put 'em down like she used to. If she could catch up to the ball, she'd have time to decide what to do. Right now, the basics of returning hard and deep are beyond her, because of her admitted lack of rehab.

Ask anyone you know who's had a third degree ankle sprain how long it was before they got back full joint articulation. I'll bet the universal answer is 'years'. And Martina had worse and more complex damage. She's a world class athlete,and will recover far faster than you or I. But it won't be instantaneous.

persond
Oct 17th, 2002, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by jojoseph


In the end, the Williams sisters have just gotten so much more powerful and make such fewer mistakes on the court now, that, like Marti said, you don't have much time to think in between points.

:( That's just not true. The Williamses haven't gotten "more" powerful, in fact, quite the opposite. They have harnessed that power and uses it less than some othe players. They have reduced their errors and become "more precise" with the placement of their shots!!:) :)

Also, you imply, yet again, that the Williamses have no intellect and just use "brute strength". I've always had the opinion that Hingis' "mental capacity" as so many of you are so quick to point out, was not what many of you praised it to be. Hingis was just more advanced and had peaked before the others had. Now, with the other players improving and peaking, Hingis' mental "prowess" is proving to be more suspect.!!!:)

What we are now witnessing is the rest of the tour catching and surpassing Hingis' '97 season form, merely because THEY have gotten better. Pure and simple!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

ot1962
Oct 17th, 2002, 07:14 PM
You asked fair questions. Let me explain my logic then...

Originally posted by jojoseph

For example, if before, it took 2 seconds to think about where to hit the ball, and now, the speed of the game has gotten faster to where you have 1.5 seconds to think about where to hit the ball, then by definition, you have less time to think.


My point is, if it took Martina 2 secs before, and now it takes her 1.5 secs, and through extrapolation, it takes the Williams 0.8 secs to think about a shot, then, Martina is a slow thinker. I hope we agree that when i say Martina is a slow Thinker, it is in relation to the Sisters? This is implied in my argument since my comparison is with the sisters.

I hope you are not implying that it takes all players the same time to think about, say shot A.
For my proof of point...If the sisters were adjudged to think at the same speed as Martina, then one must assert that they couldn't possibly be thinking of their shots before hitting them because their mind must be in sync with their physical speed. I believe they play very intelligently, therefore for them to play intelligently as such speed they must be thinking fast. Otherwise they would have to slow down their game so that they dont hit then shot before thinking about it.


Originally posted by jojoseph

At no point, does she imply anything about being a slow thinker. Just because the game has gotten faster, doesn't mean that she's a slow thinker, IMO. I take it, that that's your personal opinion, though.


If you need more time to think about something (a shot in this case) RELATIVE to someone else. You are a SLOW THINKER relative to that person. This is just the Symantics of English. It's not something i could convince you about. You would have to consult your dictionary on that.

As another example, if everybody in the world takes 2 secs to achiieve a task and you take 5 secs, i am sure you would be described as a slow thinker. This is because you are being judged RELATIVE to everyone else. In this case i am judging Martina relative to the Sisters.

Originally posted by jojoseph

actually, Volcana said "not fast".

Think about it, "slow" encompasses "not fast" because when you're slow, you are obviously "not fast". However, "not fast", does not necessarily encompass "slow", as even if you're average speed, you are "not fast", as well as "not slow" as well. Therefore, when she said "not fast", she did not imply "slow". In fact, she made that clear.



See above. The dictionary could help you there. You would beright if i am comparing Martina to say the sisters and another player who is SLOWER (in thinking of course!) than Martina. In that case Martina would be the average with the sisters being the FASTER and the other player being the SLOW thinker. But that was not the case was it? The only comparison was with the sisters.

Originally posted by jojoseph

Also, when Volcana said that Martina sometimes says sometimes she doesn't have time to think, that doesn't necessarily mean that Martina is a slow thinker. That could just mean, once again, that she's saying that the game has gotten a lot faster, which it has. I still don't get why you said "from the horses mouth". And Volcana didn't appear to be agreeing with you.


Martina said she does not have time to think. She said it right? But in the same scenario, the Sisters does not have probem thinking fast and responding in a very effective way. So if the Sisters are your standard, then Martina is slow thinker. So from the horses own mouth....
The sisters are my standard. They might not be yours.

Even using the basis of your argument above, if she meant the game has just got faster (i hope you meant mentally here, it's obvious about physical quickness), to the sisters the game is NORMAL. So in the eyes of the sisters Martina would be slow (mentally, that is!)

Originally posted by jojoseph

The thing about competition, generally speaking of course, is that things are usually gonna get better as time passes.

In the end, the Williams sisters have just gotten so much more powerful and make such fewer mistakes on the court now, that, like Marti said, you don't have much time to think in between points.

I agree that things always get better in competition.
Yes the Williams sisters make such fewer mistakes but more POWERFUL??? They have always being POWERFUL.
The reason they make fewer mistakes is because they THINK more on court. and the reason they think more on court is they do it FAST enough to sync with their pysical quickness on court.
If Martina don't have time to THINK in between points but the sisters have some much time in between points, then the sisters think faster than Martina. And when you lokk at it from the perspective of the sisters, Martina is a SLOW THINKER.
So there...

nash
Oct 17th, 2002, 07:24 PM
I think Martina's referring to the speed of the ball moving through the air (i.e. POWER) instead of the foot speed of the players. Although, I agree that the footspeed has improved as well.

BigTennisFan
Oct 17th, 2002, 07:32 PM
If BigTennisFan runs the 100 meter dash in 10 seconds and LittleTennisFan runs the 100 meter dash in 9.99368798012548792111 seconds, is BigTennisFan slow?:eek:

ot1962
Oct 17th, 2002, 07:49 PM
Originally posted by BigTennisFan
If BigTennisFan runs the 100 meter dash in 10 seconds and LittleTennisFan runs the 100 meter dash in 9.99368798012548792111 seconds, is BigTennisFan slow?:eek:

Well it depends!!...

If in BigTennisFan and LittleTennisFan's world 0.0000000001 seconds is fairly significant (e.g. if they are both Slugs!) the LittleTennisFan is a very very very SLOW mover:)

But of course if they are both not mathematically challenged, then they would round up LittleTennisFan time ,and Little and Big would feel comfortable, knowing that one is not SLOWER or FASTER than the other. Hence none of them would feel priviledged to claim that they need a LOT of Time to THINK:)

Volcana
Oct 17th, 2002, 08:13 PM
nash - The whole game, which I think is what she's referring to, has gotten faster. Players run faster, serves go faster, players choose to play high paced shots more. But again, Martina doesn't hit with much pace. Her opponents have more time to think.

Martina's ball takes 2 seconds to go from baseline to baseline.
Seeena's ball takes 1.5 seconds to go from baseline to baseline.

If it takes you 1.6 seconds to figure out what to do, are you a slow thinker or a fast one?

If it takes you 1.5 seconds to figure out what to do, but your choices are unsophicated and easy to counter, are you a slow thinker or a fast one?

If it takes you 1.7 seconds to figure out what to do, but your choice results in an unexpected winner, are you a slow thinker or a fast one?

'Thinking' isn't the same process for everyone. A winning answer that's takes an extra two tenths of second to come up with is better thana losing answer arrived at quickly.

In most people I've met, foot speed can be improved. Decision making is another matter.

o0O0o
Oct 18th, 2002, 01:31 AM
What we are now witnessing is the rest of the tour catching and surpassing Hingis' '97 season form, merely because THEY have gotten better. Pure and simple!!!

:rolleyes:

Do you want to discuss her serve? Her footspeed? Her consistence? Her volleys? Her agression?

I concede the rest of the tour is getting better, but to say Hingis is in "'97 form" reflects your knowledge of her game. And that is to say, not much.

jojoseph
Oct 18th, 2002, 01:57 AM
Originally posted by persond


1. :( That's just not true. The Williamses haven't gotten "more" powerful, in fact, quite the opposite. They have harnessed that power and uses it less than some othe players. They have reduced their errors and become "more precise" with the placement of their shots!!:) :)

2. Also, you imply, yet again, that the Williamses have no intellect and just use "brute strength". I've always had the opinion that Hingis' "mental capacity" as so many of you are so quick to point out, was not what many of you praised it to be. Hingis was just more advanced and had peaked before the others had. Now, with the other players improving and peaking, Hingis' mental "prowess" is proving to be more suspect.!!!:)

3. What we are now witnessing is the rest of the tour catching and surpassing Hingis' '97 season form, merely because THEY have gotten better. Pure and simple!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

1. well, I have to disagree. Maybe the fact that Serena has gotten more powerful is a little more noticable than Venus, as maybe Venus hasn't gotten too much more powerful. I think we just disagree here.

2. actually, I never implied that at all. I think you're used to other people, in actuality, implying that. I did not. The reason that the Williams sisters have been able to make such fewer mistakes, is because of that very reason, that they have gotten smarter on the court, combined with experience of course. I disagree about Martina. She was never a dominating player, physically, she just used what she had, and she had an enormous amount of confidence at the same time. To do what she did with the ball on the court, took an extraordinary amount of skill combined with a lot of intelligence.

3. There are only two players that you could make a serious argument for being better than Hingis was in '97, IMO. There is a tremendous amount of talent in the field today and as the sisters have pushed the envelope of greatness, of course, the other players know that they have got to step it up even that much more. That is what's happening now, IMO.

jojoseph
Oct 18th, 2002, 02:19 AM
Originally posted by ot1962
You asked fair questions. Let me explain my logic then...

1. My point is, if it took Martina 2 secs before, and now it takes her 1.5 secs, and through extrapolation, it takes the Williams 0.8 secs to think about a shot, then, Martina is a slow thinker. I hope we agree that when i say Martina is a slow Thinker, it is in relation to the Sisters? This is implied in my argument since my comparison is with the sisters.

2. I hope you are not implying that it takes all players the same time to think about, say shot A.
For my proof of point...If the sisters were adjudged to think at the same speed as Martina, then one must assert that they couldn't possibly be thinking of their shots before hitting them because their mind must be in sync with their physical speed. I believe they play very intelligently, therefore for them to play intelligently as such speed they must be thinking fast. Otherwise they would have to slow down their game so that they dont hit then shot before thinking about it.

3. If you need more time to think about something (a shot in this case) RELATIVE to someone else. You are a SLOW THINKER relative to that person. This is just the Symantics of English. It's not something i could convince you about. You would have to consult your dictionary on that.

4. As another example, if everybody in the world takes 2 secs to achiieve a task and you take 5 secs, i am sure you would be described as a slow thinker. This is because you are being judged RELATIVE to everyone else. In this case i am judging Martina relative to the Sisters.

5. Martina said she does not have time to think. She said it right? But in the same scenario, the Sisters does not have probem thinking fast and responding in a very effective way. So if the Sisters are your standard, then Martina is slow thinker. So from the horses own mouth....
The sisters are my standard. They might not be yours.

6. Even using the basis of your argument above, if she meant the game has just got faster (i hope you meant mentally here, it's obvious about physical quickness), to the sisters the game is NORMAL. So in the eyes of the sisters Martina would be slow (mentally, that is!)



7. I agree that things always get better in competition.
Yes the Williams sisters make such fewer mistakes but more POWERFUL??? They have always being POWERFUL.
The reason they make fewer mistakes is because they THINK more on court. and the reason they think more on court is they do it FAST enough to sync with their pysical quickness on court.
If Martina don't have time to THINK in between points but the sisters have some much time in between points, then the sisters think faster than Martina. And when you lokk at it from the perspective of the sisters, Martina is a SLOW THINKER.
So there...

1. actually, when you said slow thinker, I think if you meant it in relation to the sisters, you probably would have said so. Of course, if you say you implied otherwise, there is no real way of knowing whether or not you did, except for just taking your word for it. However, you just give the impression you are saying she's a slow thinker, for whatever reason.

2. dude, the point Martina was making was that there is less time to think. It had nothing to do with whether or not anyone was a slowthinker. If you think that she's a slowthinker, then that's your opinion. I disagree. Of course I was not implying that it would take everyone the same amount of time, that's just common sense. It was an example and you knew that.

3. You flat out said she was a SLOW THINKER. You never said "in relation to". Furthermore, you said that Volcana said that Martina was a slow thinker. She didn't say that. If she did, prove it. I proved she didn't by definition by using logic, and it had nothing to do with looking in a dictionary as I didn't need to.

4. You should have said "in relation to". At not point in time, did you.

5. Once again, you should say "in relation to". It doesn't take that long to write and it actually gives a clearer picture of what you actually mean, instead of it looking like you're saying Martina is just a flat out slow thinker, which wouldn't make much sense at all.

And actually, the "point" is that Martina said there was "less time to think". That comment has nothing to do with how long it takes her to think. Think about that one long and hard, big guy. You are just implying she is a slow thinker in comparison to the sisters, that's all, and if that's your opinion, that's your opinion.

6. I guess, if you consider the sisters to be the standard of comparison. However, I don't think I could say that the sisters are thinking that Martina is slow.

7. and lastly, if Venus hits the ball 100 mph and martina hits the ball 85 mph, then by definition, Martina has less time to think.

spencercarlos
Oct 18th, 2002, 05:41 AM
Iīm sorry Camp Williams, but it was not Hingisīs fault being a better player than everybody else in 97 (when u talk about being the tourīs weakest year ever), She beat a very fit Pierce at the AO Final, reached finals of Roland Garros, beating Arantxa (pretty easily) and Monica along the way, beating Novotna at Wimbledon Finals, Janaīs best surface and perhaps Hingisīs worst surface, beating Davenport and Williams to win Usopen, yeah At least Venus was still pretty new on teh tour, but Davenport was around lot longer, since 93 when Lindsay turned pro. But ok the tour has gone to a lot better level.

I think Hingisīs has lost her agressive attitude on the court, now she tries to do that again and since she is on a really LOW level of confidence she in making errors off it.
Yeah i agree with Martina, there are shots that you just have to hit them back hard or something to stay in the points.

She has to change her game a become a little more of a hard hitter in every aspect of her game to be able to challenge slams again, she can do it, its up to her. She needs to readjust her game to compete at this kind of level.

ot1962
Oct 18th, 2002, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by jojoseph


1. actually, when you said slow thinker, I think if you meant it in relation to the sisters, you probably would have said so. Of course, if you say you implied otherwise, there is no real way of knowing whether or not you did, except for just taking your word for it. However, you just give the impression you are saying she's a slow thinker, for whatever reason.

2. dude, the point Martina was making was that there is less time to think. It had nothing to do with whether or not anyone was a slowthinker. If you think that she's a slowthinker, then that's your opinion. I disagree. Of course I was not implying that it would take everyone the same amount of time, that's just common sense. It was an example and you knew that.

3. You flat out said she was a SLOW THINKER. You never said "in relation to". Furthermore, you said that Volcana said that Martina was a slow thinker. She didn't say that. If she did, prove it. I proved she didn't by definition by using logic, and it had nothing to do with looking in a dictionary as I didn't need to.

4. You should have said "in relation to". At not point in time, did you.

5. Once again, you should say "in relation to". It doesn't take that long to write and it actually gives a clearer picture of what you actually mean, instead of it looking like you're saying Martina is just a flat out slow thinker, which wouldn't make much sense at all.

And actually, the "point" is that Martina said there was "less time to think". That comment has nothing to do with how long it takes her to think. Think about that one long and hard, big guy. You are just implying she is a slow thinker in comparison to the sisters, that's all, and if that's your opinion, that's your opinion.

6. I guess, if you consider the sisters to be the standard of comparison. However, I don't think I could say that the sisters are thinking that Martina is slow.

7. and lastly, if Venus hits the ball 100 mph and martina hits the ball 85 mph, then by definition, Martina has less time to think.


jojoseph,

1. When i said Martina is a SLOW THINKER, i went ahead to compare her with the Sisters. I thought that was clear. Volcana, in his response, even said " my comparison was not fair". I said she is a slow thinker NOT for "whatever reason" because i made my point by comparing her to the sisters (Note i did not compare her to anybody else).


2.Could explain to me how saying "i have less time to Think" could not possibly mean one is a slow thinker? Now if you are saying she could possibly mean something else that she has confided in you, then please tell us.
I admit that English being an ambigous language, a statement could possible be interpreted in many ways, but i believe the obvious interpretation should be what i argued.

If you have "less time" it means it would take you LONGER that someone who does not have less time. So you are SLOW when compared with that person. You do not agree with that? Please make your argument why?

If i (say Martina) took an exam, and came out saying i had "less time" to THINK. And my two friends (say Venus and Serena) said it seems the time seem normal to them, it is most likely I Am SLOW compared to them. Now, there could be other obscure reasons like i was thinking of my lover (say Sergio), or busy having nightmares about previous FLUNKS i have had (say Ao 2002;) ). Even for these obscure reasons, it would always be because i was DISTRACTED rather than focusing fully on the exam. It would have been easier for Martina to say she was distracted. but she said "I HAVE LESS TIME to THINK"

3. I deduced the SLOW thinker from what she said.
Where did i say Volcana claim Martina is a SLOW thinker??? I made that claim by my Logical inference. I did not think i need to say "in relation" to because it was so obvious it was in relation to the sisters. I did compare her to them. As i said Volcana even responded about my COMPARISON" being unfair. So there...


4. Volcana and others were able to infere my comparison. Sorry, next time i would make it BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS.

5.Apologies again. BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS it would be, next time. With discalimers etc.;)

6. Well i beleieve if person A thinks quicker than person B, Then in person's A world, person B is slow. You don't think so? What would person B be then from the perpective of person A? Remember, it is person A "in relation" to person B.


7. That's true if Venus only plays Martina all the time. But they both have balls coming at them at 100mph from other sources. and how they react to them is the key. So when i say Venus or Serena thinks faster, it is in dealing woith whatever is coming from the other side of the net, not just Martina's balls.

Serendy Willick
Oct 18th, 2002, 06:46 PM
I sure agree with her, heck I think the tour today is much faster than in 99.