PDA

View Full Version : Will we ever see points and players like this again.


brickhousesupporter
Oct 29th, 2011, 12:55 AM
The athleticism and points that they played were breath taking. This is what is missing in the game right now. Two superb athletes who don't partically like each other going at it in a brawl. I feel like today's player are too friendly and lack that "i want to beat this bitch badly" mentality.
wnuPIS2cJ2Q

And people wonder why we look back fondly at the early 2000's. This was when women's tennis was at its peak.

Soliloque
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:11 AM
:sobbing: Tennis was so good and interesting. I want the early noughties back. 1999-2005 was peak WTA.

SwingVolley93
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:13 AM
Wow, JenCap was sponsored by Ferrari?? :eek:

Brad[le]y.
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:23 AM
9gdErzshtCU

high quality stuff :drool:

DeliriousPotato
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:36 AM
Well I don't think that tennis has this spirit anymore... :sad:
But you know what, I am kind of hopeful. Kvitova is getting better and better for instance, if her priority continues to be tennis and not WTA player parties she will be close to the girls of the old days :)

lang26
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:40 AM
i think so

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:54 AM
The athleticism and points that they played were breath taking. This is what is missing in the game right now. Two superb athletes who don't partically like each other going at it in a brawl. I feel like today's player are too friendly and lack that "i want to beat this bitch badly" mentality.
wnuPIS2cJ2Q

And people wonder why we look back fondly at the early 2000's. This was when women's tennis was at its peak.
I love that black blonde girl :kiss:

Serena at her peak is just something from another planet, especially phisically, so so difficult to hit a winner against her. Its amazing how many great shots she produces at the most critical times of a match.. mentally so strong..

Capriati also showed how good of an athlete she was as well by staying with her... Just great stuff.
And to think that back then Capriati was probably the pusher of that match.. Neither the pushers of today or the ballbashers come close to anything like that..

njnetswill
Oct 29th, 2011, 02:16 AM
mNCnWPeHOGI

This is probably our best shot. They still have a long way to go before reaching Serena-JCap levels though, but it's possible.

ys
Oct 29th, 2011, 02:55 AM
Yep.. Courts were greener, tits were bigger.

cowsonice
Oct 29th, 2011, 03:20 AM
....never :rolleyes:

I know members here are nostalgic for that era, but I think we're only going through a transition period, which is exacerbated by some of the WTA's poor decisions.

ptkten
Oct 29th, 2011, 03:29 AM
I just wish we had players that were good both offensively and defensively. Serena, Capriati, Venus, Henin, Hingis, and Clijsters could both control points but also play good defense. The players today seem to only do one or the other unfortunately which makes for poor matches.

It's my opinion and I know some people will vehemently disagree, but I think Azarenka is the one who has the most potential to be a dual threat player like those of the great period in the early 2000's. She can play at an elite level but she sometimes gets lulled into being too safe on her shots. She's moving the best she ever has and she can control points if she wants to but she just hasn't put it all together yet.

metamorpha
Oct 29th, 2011, 03:43 AM
We basically need someone to wake them up by dominating the tour with iron grip and raise the quality bar.

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:37 AM
I know members here are nostalgic for that era


Some people called it nostalgia, some call it revisionist history. I think anyone who has seen the RG final of 2002 would refrain from claiming that tennis was at its peak in 2002. :tape: :help:

Chip.
Oct 29th, 2011, 11:32 AM
Some people called it nostalgia, some call it revisionist history. I think anyone who has seen the RG final of 2002 would refrain from claiming that tennis was at its peak in 2002. :tape: :help:

:yawn: We know you don't like the WS. Have a seat.

barmaid
Oct 29th, 2011, 11:36 AM
Some people called it nostalgia, some call it revisionist history. I think anyone who has seen the RG final of 2002 would refrain from claiming that tennis was at its peak in 2002. :tape: :help:
I disagree, that 1997/2002 era did produce excellent tennis, yes you're going to have a fluke slam now and then due to injuries & entangibles but look at this year's results, Serena, Li Na, Kivita and then Sam S. but the quality is where the difference lies, the video replays show for example how Serena and Jennifer were far more athletic than today's players plus Venus and Martina played the angles so cleverly.:worship:.beats brainless "ball bashing" everytime!:lol:

Barmaid:wavey:

laurie
Oct 29th, 2011, 11:46 AM
some more nostalgia for you

K7cmHy0VHRw


V4SoGOvUK20

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 11:52 AM
I disagree, that 1997/2002 era did produce excellent tennis, yes you're going to have a fluke slam now and then due to injuries & entangibles but look at this year's results, Serena, Li Na, Kivita and then Sam S. but the quality is where the difference lies, the video replays show for example how Serena and Jennifer were far more athletic than today's players plus Venus and Martina played the angles so cleverly.:worship:.beats brainless "ball bashing" everytime!:lol:

Barmaid:wavey:


The quality was a bit better at the very top (only minimal in 1997 and 2002, though) but the overall depth of the field is much better now. And the game is also more physical overall than it was 10 yeras ago obviously.

But of course also in 1997/2002 WTA tennis was very good. Just because I'm not living in the past doesn't mean that I can't enjoy it :worship:

Soliloque
Oct 29th, 2011, 12:09 PM
I disagree, that 1997/2002 era did produce excellent tennis, yes you're going to have a fluke slam now and then due to injuries & entangibles but look at this year's results, Serena, Li Na, Kivita and then Sam S. but the quality is where the difference lies, the video replays show for example how Serena and Jennifer were far more athletic than today's players plus Venus and Martina played the angles so cleverly.:worship:.beats brainless "ball bashing" everytime!:lol:

Barmaid:wavey:

I understood that Kivita was Kvitova, but Clijsters is not spelled like Serena.

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 12:51 PM
The quality was a bit better at the very top (only minimal in 1997 and 2002, though) but the overall depth of the field is much better now. And the game is also more physical overall than it was 10 yeras ago obviously.

But of course also in 1997/2002 WTA tennis was very good. Just because I'm not living in the past doesn't mean that I can't enjoy it :worship:
No Matt, no this is not the early 90ties where you can call great depth in the top 10 but little left after that.

Look at the top 20 for these years.

In 2000 you had this top 20 .. 1 Martina Hingis,Lindsay Davenport,Venus Williams,Monica Seles,Conchita Martinez,Serena Williams,Mary Pierce,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anna Kournikova,Nathalie Tauziat,Elena Dementieva,Amanda Coetzer,Chanda Rubin,Jennifer Capriati,Julie Halard-Decugis, Amelie Mauresmo,Sandrine Testud,Kim Clijsters,Anke Huber, Amy Frazier

In 2001
Lindsay Davenport,Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams,Martina Hingis,Kim Clijsters,Serena Williams,Justine Henin,Jelena Dokic, Amelie Mauresmo, Monica Seles,Sandrine Testud ,Meghann Shaughnessy,Nathalie Tauziat ,Silvia Farina Elia,Elena Dementieva,Magdalena Maleeva,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anke Huber,Amanda Coetzer,Iroda Tulyaganova

Now that's a top field, with the exception of very few names. Today you look at the YEC today and matchup the top 8 of each, and the 2000-2001 field would probably beat every player of today rather easily.

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 12:57 PM
The quality was a bit better at the very top (only minimal in 1997 and 2002, though) but the overall depth of the field is much better now. And the game is also more physical overall than it was 10 yeras ago obviously.

But of course also in 1997/2002 WTA tennis was very good. Just because I'm not living in the past doesn't mean that I can't enjoy it :worship:
BS. The game was just as phisical as it is now.

The thing is that players like Clijsters, Serena, Venus (ill as well) are getting older, and the upcoming generation, the Wozniacki Radwanska's and Azarenka and the rest of ball bashers are way less talented than the previous generation ones.

sammy01
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:06 PM
We basically need someone to wake them up by dominating the tour with iron grip and raise the quality bar.

but who? all the new girls that come through are nowhere near the athletes serena, kim, venus and henin are/were. even if say kvitova controls her game she still will never run down balls that those 4 have. until we get a player come through who can both attack but is also a true athlete the tour will not get those kind of rallies again.

brickhousesupporter
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:13 PM
Some people called it nostalgia, some call it revisionist history. I think anyone who has seen the RG final of 2002 would refrain from claiming that tennis was at its peak in 2002. :tape: :help:
No one is saying that those days didn't have a few off matches Matt. However, it just seemed like there were more good matches between top players. I think the players today are just less athletic. They care more about getting dolled up and modelling than becoming the physical specimens needed to dominate the game. Look at Justine, she did what she needed to get physically strong enough to compete. It is not like she could be a glamour girl anyways but that is beside my point.

tennisbum79
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:21 PM
No Matt, no this is not the early 90ties where you can call great depth in the top 10 but little left after that.

Look at the top 20 for these years.

In 2000 you had this top 20 .. 1 Martina Hingis,Lindsay Davenport,Venus Williams,Monica Seles,Conchita Martinez,Serena Williams,Mary Pierce,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anna Kournikova,Nathalie Tauziat,Elena Dementieva,Amanda Coetzer,Chanda Rubin,Jennifer Capriati,Julie Halard-Decugis, Amelie Mauresmo,Sandrine Testud,Kim Clijsters,Anke Huber, Amy Frazier

In 2001
Lindsay Davenport,Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams,Martina Hingis,Kim Clijsters,Serena Williams,Justine Henin,Jelena Dokic, Amelie Mauresmo, Monica Seles,Sandrine Testud ,Meghann Shaughnessy,Nathalie Tauziat ,Silvia Farina Elia,Elena Dementieva,Magdalena Maleeva,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anke Huber,Amanda Coetzer,Iroda Tulyaganova

Now that's a top field, with the exception of very few names. Today you look at the YEC today and matchup the top 8 of each, and the 2000-2001 field would probably beat every player of today rather easily.

... that is NOT revisionist history. Just reading those names and compare to today's top 10.

Matt can't call this revisionist history

Sammo
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:34 PM
9gdErzshtCU

high quality stuff :drool:

:drool:

The Dawntreader
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:45 PM
The game was brimmed with tremendous athletes at the top of the game. That's one of the key losses to the modern game imo, the complete regression of athleticism.

All we have now is ungainly or immobile ball-strikers, or underpowered counter-punchers/junk ballers- at the top of the game. It's ludicrous to me how less physical the game has become.

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:04 PM
No Matt, no this is not the early 90ties where you can call great depth in the top 10 but little left after that.

Look at the top 20 for these years.

In 2000 you had this top 20 .. 1 Martina Hingis,Lindsay Davenport,Venus Williams,Monica Seles,Conchita Martinez,Serena Williams,Mary Pierce,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anna Kournikova,Nathalie Tauziat,Elena Dementieva,Amanda Coetzer,Chanda Rubin,Jennifer Capriati,Julie Halard-Decugis, Amelie Mauresmo,Sandrine Testud,Kim Clijsters,Anke Huber, Amy Frazier

In 2001
Lindsay Davenport,Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams,Martina Hingis,Kim Clijsters,Serena Williams,Justine Henin,Jelena Dokic, Amelie Mauresmo, Monica Seles,Sandrine Testud ,Meghann Shaughnessy,Nathalie Tauziat ,Silvia Farina Elia,Elena Dementieva,Magdalena Maleeva,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anke Huber,Amanda Coetzer,Iroda Tulyaganova

Now that's a top field, with the exception of very few names. Today you look at the YEC today and matchup the top 8 of each, and the 2000-2001 field would probably beat every player of today rather easily.


Based on what? On their achievements of the past?
And I was talking about the overall depth of the field, not the Top 10 players or the Top 20 players.
It is always unfair to compare the Top players of a certain year when we know all their achievements with the player's of today who are still playing.


No one is saying that those days didn't have a few off matches Matt.

A few? As many or almost as many as today.

However, it just seemed like there were more good matches between top players.

Maybe for you it seems like that but I still have to see the evidence :shrug:

I think the players today are just less athletic.

I don't think so.
When I look at players of today, at Wozanicki, Stosur and the likes, I'm seeing lots of athletic players. Watch the AO match of Kuzzie and Schiavone for example.

They care more about getting dolled up and modelling than becoming the physical specimens needed to dominate the game.

Don't generalize, please.

Look at Justine, she did what she needed to get physically strong enough to compete.

Justine was an exception.

It is not like she could be a glamour girl anyways but that is beside my point.

Yeh, that's beside the point.

No1Curr
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:15 PM
Not when fatties like Woz are at the top you won't.

starin
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:32 PM
01OeW8wyeBM
It's sad to watch this and realize how slow and terrible the current players are. Stosur, Kvitova, Azarenka and Zvonareva could only dream of combing the power and athleticism that Capriati and Serena displayed in this match.

Stonerpova
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:34 PM
7 billion people are on this planet. I'm sure two of them are capable of that type of athleticism. Let's relax.

Kairi
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:36 PM
Not when fatties like Woz are at the top you won't.

^ :spit: :hysteric: ..and yeah, 2012 :oh:

pav
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:36 PM
Put out your pipe, stop dribbling, do up your buttons, and stop rambling on about the good ol days,bloody whackers!

starin
Oct 29th, 2011, 04:37 PM
No Matt, no this is not the early 90ties where you can call great depth in the top 10 but little left after that.

Look at the top 20 for these years.

In 2000 you had this top 20 .. 1 Martina Hingis,Lindsay Davenport,Venus Williams,Monica Seles,Conchita Martinez,Serena Williams,Mary Pierce,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anna Kournikova,Nathalie Tauziat,Elena Dementieva,Amanda Coetzer,Chanda Rubin,Jennifer Capriati,Julie Halard-Decugis, Amelie Mauresmo,Sandrine Testud,Kim Clijsters,Anke Huber, Amy Frazier

In 2001
Lindsay Davenport,Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams,Martina Hingis,Kim Clijsters,Serena Williams,Justine Henin,Jelena Dokic, Amelie Mauresmo, Monica Seles,Sandrine Testud ,Meghann Shaughnessy,Nathalie Tauziat ,Silvia Farina Elia,Elena Dementieva,Magdalena Maleeva,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anke Huber,Amanda Coetzer,Iroda Tulyaganova

Now that's a top field, with the exception of very few names. Today you look at the YEC today and matchup the top 8 of each, and the 2000-2001 field would probably beat every player of today rather easily.

:worship:

Looking at this list only makes women's tennis more depressing. When Serena's gone I'm done with women's tennis for awhile cuz there isn't any young player on the horizon that looks promising either. It looks like they are all pushers or slow ball bashers.

hotandspicey
Oct 29th, 2011, 05:01 PM
[quote=spencercarlos;20424156]I love that black blonde girl :kiss:

Serena at her peak is just something from another planet, especially phisically, so so difficult to hit a winner against her. Its amazing how many great shots she produces at the most critical times of a match.. mentally so strong..

Capriati also showed how good of an athlete she was as well by staying with her... Just great stuff.
And to think that back then Capriati was probably the pusher of that match.. Neither the pushers of today or the ballbashers come close to anything like that..[/quote


Word up!! I sometimes amuse myself and say she should have been the one named Venus!!:lol: That's why, barring all the other aspects taken into account, she remains one of the greatest to ever play the game.:worship:

Libertango
Oct 29th, 2011, 05:17 PM
All sports go in cycles - it's happened/happening in firgure skating and gymnastics (the other sports I follow as closely as tennis) and it happened in the ATP about 7-8 years ago, before Fed stepped up. Remember the days when WTA was more popular than ATP?! However, not every single era/generation can be better than the last.

I don't particularly like constantly harping on about the "old days", but yes, I have to agree, the tennis from about 99 to 05 was far more entertaining than it is today. I'd much rather watch any of Martina, Vee, Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justne et al. go at it than pretty much anyone at the YEC this year, but I still enjoy the sport and respect the players for all their efforts. It's just the way sport goes sometimes.

Watching classics from ten years ago really does make some of the top players/match-ups from the current era look almost pedestrian, but I personally have alot of hope that Petra Kvitova might drag the women back in a very positive direction.

denny5576
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:10 PM
Illusions, illusions...
You could not be more wrong...
The athleticism in 2002 is far less than of today's. Many of today's players are quicker and stronger than all tops of 2002 - 2003.

The speed and the power of the players, the speed of the ball, everything was less in 2002 – 2003 than is 7-8 years later.
Many think Serena 2002 - 2003 is quicker, faster, stronger than Serena 2010. Wrong.
Many think Sharapova 2004 - 2006 is quicker, faster, stronger than Sharapova 2009 - 2011. Wrong.

Serena Wimbledon 2003:
Average 1st Serve Speed 161 163 164 164 164 166 166
Serena Wimbledon 2010:
Average 1st Serve Speed 172 171 172 182 179 174 169

denny5576
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:16 PM
I feel like today's player are too friendly and lack that "i want to beat this bitch badly" mentality.

Agree

LUVMIRZA
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:44 PM
It was great but we cant live in the past:shrug:
Vika, Petra and Aga has the potential to take WTA to new heights. Have to wait and see:angel:

sammy01
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:48 PM
Illusions, illusions...
You could not be more wrong...
The athleticism in 2002 is far less than of today's. Many of today's players are quicker and stronger than all tops of 2002 - 2003.

The speed and the power of the players, the speed of the ball, everything was less in 2002 – 2003 than is 7-8 years later.
Many think Serena 2002 - 2003 is quicker, faster, stronger than Serena 2010. Wrong.
Many think Sharapova 2004 - 2006 is quicker, faster, stronger than Sharapova 2009 - 2011. Wrong.

Serena Wimbledon 2003:
Average 1st Serve Speed 161 163 164 164 164 166 166
Serena Wimbledon 2010:
Average 1st Serve Speed 172 171 172 182 179 174 169


serena's serve is only quicker because of the improved technology and strings, she is by no means the athlete she once was.

as for the bolded bit who in todays tennis is faster than serena and clijsters, who has more end range power than those 2 (i.e hitting on the dead run), both to me are a step slower than their heyday but are both still the 2 best athletes in womens tennis. put these 2 in a 100 meter sprint vs any other top player today and they would leave them in their wake. they are the perfect match of speed and explosive power when it comes to movement.

no girl on tour right now has a slice that can match henin or momo, the explosive movement to match serena and kim or the gorgeous soft hands to manipulate balls like davenport.

no one on this planet can onvince me clijsters or serena are as good as the players they were in their respective primes (2002, 2003, 2005 for kim), they shouldn't still be ruling tennis as they can when fit. the only reason they can is the competition has plummeted and they are still great players.

metamorpha
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:56 PM
but who? all the new girls that come through are nowhere near the athletes serena, kim, venus and henin are/were. even if say kvitova controls her game she still will never run down balls that those 4 have. until we get a player come through who can both attack but is also a true athlete the tour will not get those kind of rallies again.

Athleticism is not the only thing. All those four players you mentioned (FIVE including J-Cap) suffered serious injuries throughout their career. We need someone DIFFERENT now who is mentally strong and has a big, effective, efficient and respectable game that nobody could answer. Not another muscular power player please. Someone who doesn't rely too much on fitness. Think Federer, Graf, and Henin.

Even Masha could jump all over Serena, Kim, Davenport and Henin sometime from 2004 to 2006, and she's not that athletic (but f-ked her shoulders anyway). So yeah, Oracene recognized this player had bright future and Hingis once said this player had effortless and efficient game with a huge lefty serve.

The problem is, she's prone to inconsistency because she's still rather one-dimensional, always go for her shots when she's just not clicking.

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:59 PM
Some people called it nostalgia, some call it revisionist history. I think anyone who has seen the RG final of 2002 would refrain from claiming that tennis was at its peak in 2002. :tape: :help:

:facepalm: Matty, Matty...what's gotten into you, my friend?! The bitterness...:lol: I know being a Caro-fan is hard, but geez..relax.

If we're going down that route...as if Juju played or even had to play great tennis to win any of her RG's?! :shrug:
And if Caro could play even HALF as good as the WS did in that '02 RG final, she'd have a major by now. :kiss::wavey:

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:02 PM
Athleticism is not the only thing. All those four players you mentioned (FIVE including J-Cap) suffered serious injuries throughout their career. We need someone DIFFERENT now who is mentally strong and has a big, effective, efficient and respectable game that nobody could answer. Not another muscular power player please. Someone who doesn't rely too much on fitness. Think Federer, Graf, and Henin.

Even Masha could jump all over Serena, Kim, Davenport and Henin sometime from 2004 to 2006, and she's not that athletic (but f-ked her shoulders anyway). So yeah, Oracene recognized this player had bright future and Hingis once said this player had effortless and efficient game with a huge lefty serve.

The problem is, she's prone to inconsistency because she's still rather one-dimensional, always go for her shots when she's just not clicking.

Muscular power player?! And Henin?! :spit: Didn't she start dominating ONLY after she bulked up, so what finesse are you talking about?

Masha jumped all over Serena?! ONCE :lol: Hello..have you seen the h2h?! :facepalm:

metamorpha
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:04 PM
Muscular power player?! And Henin?! :spit: Didn't she start dominating ONLY after she bulked up, so what finesse are you talking about?

Masha jumped all over Serena?! ONCE :lol: Hello..have you seen the h2h?! :facepalm:

Yes, got an illness, and finally get one last serious injury, forced to permanent retirement :)

What finesse I'm talking about? Think Federer, Graf, and Henin. They didn't just rely on raw power and one-dimensional game right?

I know what I'm talking about. It's from 2004 to 2006, you know where Serena was during that period. Jumping all over is just an acceptable hyperbole. No need to react over the top.

denny5576
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:08 PM
i like maria, but she's noticeably slower than she was 2004-2006 (there's a reason she got the nickname "slowazz Pova" a couple months ago :hysteric: Maria had some pretty decent defensive abilities around 04-06..but now :help:
I respect yor opinion but it does not correspond to the reality.
The video of Maria's matches are available. Measure the speed of her movement and you'll see how faster she is in 2009 - 2011.
Maria's defense in 2004 - 2006 is approx. 18% - 25% worse than it is now.

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:10 PM
:facepalm: Matty, Matty...what's gotten into you, my friend?! The bitterness...:lol: I know being a Caro-fan is hard, but geez..relax.

If we're going down that route...as if Juju played or even had to play great tennis to win any of her RG's?! :shrug:
And if Caro could play even HALF as good as the WS did in that '02 RG final, she'd have a major by now. :kiss::wavey:


Being a Caro fan is very easy these days since she has just finished another season as #1. :shrug: She would have never gotten there if she had played like the players did in that RG final, though...

denny5576
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:14 PM
no one on this planet can onvince me clijsters or serena are as good as the players they were in their respective primes (2002, 2003, 2005 for kim)....
:)
Why talk then?

moemoe
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:20 PM
Oh you guys I really long for that time too. I was watching Vika vs. Vera and I felt like one was just too safe and the other forgot how to do basic tennis.
And I don't like that friendly stuff either. We need more competitiveness, like a bunch of cocky basketball players at an American University.

metamorpha
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:28 PM
Oh you guys I really long for that time too. I was watching Vika vs. Vera and I felt like one was just too safe and the other forgot how to do basic tennis.
And I don't like that friendly stuff either. We need more competitiveness, like a bunch of cocky basketball players at an American University.

Well, two years later, Capriati engaged in a demented battle against Lena D. in USO SF 2004 while Serena already showed signs of no more taking full-time job on the tour.

LOL

moemoe
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:32 PM
Well, two years later, Capriati engaged in a demented battle against Lena D. in USO SF 2004 while Serena already showed signs of no more taking full-time job on the tour.

LOL

Wait what happened? With Lena D?

le bon vivant
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:35 PM
While I love Serena and her tennis now, nothing can compare to that level in 2002.
I'm telling you, USTA needs to do more outreach in communities where it traditionally hasn't, in order to scout out and support some of the really talented, athletic girls. Young women now are more athletic than ever before, but they are being steered towards track, basketball and soccer because tennis is not seen a viable option for them. WTA tennis will enter a period of all time low interest once Serena retires, especially if Kvitova is the only hope for a future of exciting tennis.

metamorpha
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:45 PM
Wait what happened? With Lena D?

It's on youtube. Just watch 2nd highlights, I think that's the 3rd set.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY2fICGc6Uo

A hilarious match which is hard to fathom. Capriati was non-existent in the 1st set, woke up in the 2nd set, and then played like a total pusher on the 3rd set... knowing well that Dementieva was struggling with her less-than-amateurish serve. It's hard to believe Capriati couldn't beat a player with no serve.... :facepalm:

I watched this LIVE before and laughed hard because it's so comedic. Capriati couldn't return Lena's horrible serve and always playing tentatively on key points, yeah... like a pusher.

frenchie
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:48 PM
There's no WAY Serena is at that level right now!

the serve might be slightly better but the ground strokes and speed have deteriorated.
she's still the best player right now, which is even more scary for the rest of the Tour...

JCTennisFan
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:49 PM
Ah, how I love Jenny. She gave us so many memorable matches :). Love her or hate her.... if your a tennis fan you surely remember her :)

dragonflies
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:54 PM
You can't argue with the quality of the " Golden Age" in 99-2005 when women tennis was at its peak. So many talented players blossomed at the time. Add personality, the diversity, excitement, rivalry and the competition at the top, you had top class tennis. Women tennis was prime at that time and got even more attention from the public overal, even more than the men.


Now the depth of the field is better with players in the top 100, 200 are better than their equivalences 10 years ago. They are taller, stronger, hit harder then in the past. That makes it harder to maintain a good result year long, applied to all the players.



However, the cream on the top are surely lack of talents and star power, comparing to the previous generation. comparing their plays in the tapes we can easily see that. It's kind of a transition state of the game where the older trees still hanging, yet the younger ones haven't reached the required height. No wonder women tennis is falling too far behind men tennis which is close to its peak now. Most of WTA's tournaments have had pathetic attendence, even some top players had to play before deserted crowds in empty stadium which is really sad.


Still, I am enjoying tennis from what it can offering now. There are some hope for the following years.

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:00 PM
I love that black blonde girl :kiss:

Serena at her peak is just something from another planet, especially phisically, so so difficult to hit a winner against her. Its amazing how many great shots she produces at the most critical times of a match.. mentally so strong..

Capriati also showed how good of an athlete she was as well by staying with her... Just great stuff.
And to think that back then Capriati was probably the pusher of that match.. Neither the pushers of today or the ballbashers come close to anything like that..
touche'

dragonflies
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:03 PM
There's no WAY Serena is at that level right now!

the serve might be slightly better but the ground strokes and speed have deteriorated.
she's still the best player right now, which is even more scary for the rest of the Tour...



Correct.

Serena is more experiences now, but overal she is not as dangerous as she was. Her serve remains great, but most the time hasn't been that strong. Her footwork is a bit better now, but foodspeed is no where compared to the past where she ran for almost every ball. Same for the flexibility. Groundstroke is less overwhelming more often. Her confidence level is also down, esp when she is under pressure.

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:03 PM
:yawn: We know you don't like the WS. Have a seat.
:spit:

JCTennisFan
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:03 PM
It's on youtube. Just watch 2nd highlights, I think that's the 3rd set.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY2fICGc6Uo

A hilarious match which is hard to fathom. Capriati was non-existent in the 1st set, woke up in the 2nd set, and then played like a total pusher on the 3rd set... knowing well that Dementieva was struggling with her less-than-amateurish serve. It's hard to believe Capriati couldn't beat a player with no serve.... :facepalm:

I watched this LIVE before and laughed hard because it's so comedic. Capriati couldn't return Lena's horrible serve and always playing tentatively on key points, yeah... like a pusher.

Oh come on.... Dementieva could make almost anyone look like a pusher off the ground when she was in form. The first set from her was some of the best tennis she ever played.. she stomped Cap. the 3rd set was very close... and dementieva played like a bulldog, not really giving anything up. And since dementieva was injured and could not move quite as well as usual, she seemed to put more pace on the ball that match to try to make up for it. She really played an exceptional match, so I dont think Jenny should be saddened.

Having a final set tiebreak at the Open has really never made any sense to me. I think it puts WAY too much emphasis on just a few points. I understand a tiebreak in the first sets... but in the Final set its just dumb. Who knows, Jen might of won one of those 3 3rd sets if they didnt have a tiebreak.

shap_half
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:16 PM
but who? all the new girls that come through are nowhere near the athletes serena, kim, venus and henin are/were. even if say kvitova controls her game she still will never run down balls that those 4 have. until we get a player come through who can both attack but is also a true athlete the tour will not get those kind of rallies again.

As much as the bitch annoys me, Azarenka might be poised to be that player. I really hope she continues to develop her game before she wins a slam, because I can see her going down a very different path where she gets complacent because of how incredibly shitty the tour is. You look at players like Serena and Justine, and you see that they took their games to another level not so they can win but so they can dominate. Justine was consistently tweaking her game, and Serena really transformed herself after she saw that the game that won the Open in 99 was not going to cut it if she wanted to be best player in the world.

Azarenka's game still has many flaws, but what really impressed me this week was how well she retrieved balls. She really pushed to defend as well as she can. We'll see...

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:16 PM
No Matt, no this is not the early 90ties where you can call great depth in the top 10 but little left after that.

Look at the top 20 for these years.

In 2000 you had this top 20 .. 1 Martina Hingis,Lindsay Davenport,Venus Williams,Monica Seles,Conchita Martinez,Serena Williams,Mary Pierce,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anna Kournikova,Nathalie Tauziat,Elena Dementieva,Amanda Coetzer,Chanda Rubin,Jennifer Capriati,Julie Halard-Decugis, Amelie Mauresmo,Sandrine Testud,Kim Clijsters,Anke Huber, Amy Frazier

In 2001
Lindsay Davenport,Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams,Martina Hingis,Kim Clijsters,Serena Williams,Justine Henin,Jelena Dokic, Amelie Mauresmo, Monica Seles,Sandrine Testud ,Meghann Shaughnessy,Nathalie Tauziat ,Silvia Farina Elia,Elena Dementieva,Magdalena Maleeva,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anke Huber,Amanda Coetzer,Iroda Tulyaganova

Now that's a top field, with the exception of very few names. Today you look at the YEC today and matchup the top 8 of each, and the 2000-2001 field would probably beat every player of today rather easily.

BS. The game was just as phisical as it is now.

The thing is that players like Clijsters, Serena, Venus (ill as well) are getting older, and the upcoming generation, the Wozniacki Radwanska's and Azarenka and the rest of ball bashers are way less talented than the previous generation ones.
This

No one is saying that those days didn't have a few off matches Matt. However, it just seemed like there were more good matches between top players. I think the players today are just less athletic. They care more about getting dolled up and modelling than becoming the physical specimens needed to dominate the game. Look at Justine, she did what she needed to get physically strong enough to compete. It is :like she could be a glamour girl anyways but that is beside my point.
Oh my. :spit:

metamorpha
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:17 PM
Oh come on.... Dementieva could make almost anyone look like a pusher off the ground when she was in form. The first set from her was some of the best tennis she ever played.. she stomped Cap. the 3rd set was very close... and dementieva played like a bulldog, not really giving anything up. And since dementieva was injured and could not move quite as well as usual, she seemed to put more pace on the ball that match to try to make up for it. She really played an exceptional match, so I dont think Jenny should be saddened.

Having a final set tiebreak at the Open has really never made any sense to me. I think it puts WAY too much emphasis on just a few points. I understand a tiebreak in the first sets... but in the Final set its just dumb. Who knows, Jen might of won one of those 3 3rd sets if they didnt have a tiebreak.

Well, I still remembered tho, Lena said something which implies that it was strange to win 6-0 in the first set and she's not really happy because she might wake up a sleeping lion in the 2nd set. Lena knew that she played great but still Capriati helped her by not playing like usual. On the 3rd set they're quite even, but Capriati decided to take a route of a pusher. Not sure if it's also windy that time.

dragonflies
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:19 PM
Illusions, illusions...
You could not be more wrong...
The athleticism in 2002 is far less than of today's. Many of today's players are quicker and stronger than all tops of 2002 - 2003.

The speed and the power of the players, the speed of the ball, everything was less in 2002 – 2003 than is 7-8 years later.
Many think Serena 2002 - 2003 is quicker, faster, stronger than Serena 2010. Wrong.
Many think Sharapova 2004 - 2006 is quicker, faster, stronger than Sharapova 2009 - 2011. Wrong.

Serena Wimbledon 2003:
Average 1st Serve Speed 161 163 164 164 164 166 166
Serena Wimbledon 2010:
Average 1st Serve Speed 172 171 172 182 179 174 169



I am not into digging out stats, but the stats you posted is not enough to paint the whole picture.


I already said the tour average level of athleticism is higher now than in the past, only the perfomance at the top is lacking.


The stats above is Serena vs herself in one particular tournament. Notice that Serena played an outstanding Wimbledon tourney where she served incredibily. She beat Kvitova who was playing very well, about the same level of Kvitova this year Wimbledon imo. If it wasnt for Serena last year, Kvitova already won Wimbledon 10 beating Vera in the final. That was also the reason that I said one poster was delusional when she said Justine was on her track winning last year Wimbledon in another thread.



However, Serena has not played at that high level at other tournies in the last 2 years, including her victory at the AO. So your stats of the serve speed only is not enough proofs to prove the level of play and speed of the games today and the past.

shap_half
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:23 PM
Two things about the OP's video: I love blonde Serena; Jennifer Capriati, that bitch will complain about very close call that ever existed. She's like the trampled martyr of the WTA.

brickhousesupporter
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:27 PM
Two things about the OP's video: I love blonde Serena; Jennifer Capriati, that bitch will complain about very close call that ever existed. She's like the trampled martyr of the WTA.
And get away with it......why?.....she had the complection for protection.

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:35 PM
01OeW8wyeBM
It's sad to watch this and realize how slow and terrible the current players are. Stosur, Kvitova, Azarenka and Zvonareva could only dream of combing the power and athleticism that Capriati and Serena displayed in this match.
During those days didn't matter whether your fav won or not, you were exhausted when the match was over.

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:36 PM
7 billion people are on this planet. I'm sure two of them are capable of that type of athleticism. Let's relax.
Would actually love to have more than two of them.

Sammo
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:47 PM
Breaking News: contrary to what ancient Greeks thought, the time is not cyclical.

le bon vivant
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:48 PM
And get away with it......why?.....she had the complection for protection.Again bro, come this way...
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltgx2dGlXF1qbny29.gif
:lol:

During those days didn't matter whether your fav won or not, you were exhausted when the match was over.This! Especially a Serena/Capriati match. Capriati returned Serena's 1st and second serve better than any other player in history, every second was so tense.

Uranus
Oct 29th, 2011, 08:54 PM
The 1997-2003 period was really good.
It was much weaker in 2004-2005, with the best players being injured and new girls emerging.
Everything went much better in 2006-2007 with those new players emerging, some other ones radically improving and other champions being back from injury.
Since 2008, it has gone downhill for sure.

jrollaneres25
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:00 PM
The athleticism and points that they played were breath taking. This is what is missing in the game right now. Two superb athletes who don't partically like each other going at it in a brawl. I feel like today's player are too friendly and lack that "i want to beat this bitch badly" mentality.
wnuPIS2cJ2Q

And people wonder why we look back fondly at the early 2000's. This was when women's tennis was at its peak.

The point @10:38, Serena's movement is breathtaking:eek::worship:
How in the hell did Serena track that down!?? Even Jennifer was in awe

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:10 PM
Yes, got an illness, and finally get one last serious injury, forced to permanent retirement :)

What finesse I'm talking about? Think Federer, Graf, and Henin. They didn't just rely on raw power and one-dimensional game right?

I know what I'm talking about. It's from 2004 to 2006, you know where Serena was during that period. Jumping all over is just an acceptable hyperbole. No need to react over the top.

And who relied just on raw power and one-dimensional game? Juju's the least acomplished of the 3 players you're naming there anyways, soo..:lol:

Serena was missing, so that's the only time Masha jumped over anybody.

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:11 PM
Ah, how I love Jenny. She gave us so many memorable matches :). Love her or hate her.... if your a tennis fan you surely remember her :)
Jen use to scare the hell out of me when she played Serena. Like you said, love her or hate her the girl was awesome and like Serena never gave up.

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:12 PM
Being a Caro fan is very easy these days since she has just finished another season as #1. :shrug: She would have never gotten there if she had played like the players did in that RG final, though...

:rolls: Another season as # 1, another season of ridicule by everybody. Yayyyy!! :bounce:

'02 RG wasn't the only final, these two players played in '02 anyways...so :lol: Ah Matty Matty..

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:18 PM
:lol: And of course Matty ain't gonna say no word about the '02 YEC SF. :lol: What a coward this guy's become. :sad:

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:20 PM
Two things about the OP's video: I love blonde Serena; Jennifer Capriati, that bitch will complain about very close call that ever existed. She's like the trampled martyr of the WTA.
:lol: to true

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:20 PM
:rolls: Another season as # 1, another season of ridicule by everybody. Yayyyy!! :bounce:


Ridcicule by the haters and trolls...like I care ;)

But you probably think that the RG final 02 was a great match because your fave won it :spit:
And that match was obviously only an example. 2002 had lots of bad matches and injured top players (like Hingis, Davenport). Hell, Venus couldn't even hit a proper second serve for half of the season :o

Londoner
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:24 PM
No Matt, no this is not the early 90ties where you can call great depth in the top 10 but little left after that.

Look at the top 20 for these years.

In 2000 you had this top 20 .. 1 Martina Hingis,Lindsay Davenport,Venus Williams,Monica Seles,Conchita Martinez,Serena Williams,Mary Pierce,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anna Kournikova,Nathalie Tauziat,Elena Dementieva,Amanda Coetzer,Chanda Rubin,Jennifer Capriati,Julie Halard-Decugis, Amelie Mauresmo,Sandrine Testud,Kim Clijsters,Anke Huber, Amy Frazier

In 2001
Lindsay Davenport,Jennifer Capriati, Venus Williams,Martina Hingis,Kim Clijsters,Serena Williams,Justine Henin,Jelena Dokic, Amelie Mauresmo, Monica Seles,Sandrine Testud ,Meghann Shaughnessy,Nathalie Tauziat ,Silvia Farina Elia,Elena Dementieva,Magdalena Maleeva,Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, Anke Huber,Amanda Coetzer,Iroda Tulyaganova

Now that's a top field, with the exception of very few names. Today you look at the YEC today and matchup the top 8 of each, and the 2000-2001 field would probably beat every player of today rather easily.

Thank you. Even though seeing those names actually hurts a little.:sad:

Moveyourfeet
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:25 PM
Illusions, illusions...
Many think Serena 2002 - 2003 is quicker, faster, stronger than Serena 2010. Wrong.
Many think Sharapova 2004 - 2006 is quicker, faster, stronger than Sharapova 2009 - 2011. Wrong.

Serena Wimbledon 2003:
Average 1st Serve Speed 161 163 164 164 164 166 166
Serena Wimbledon 2010:
Average 1st Serve Speed 172 171 172 182 179 174 169

You offer no evidence of Serena or Pova being faster now than before. Just a blind assertion.
- One can look at Serena of 2002-2003 and see that she was a physical specimen and lighter than she currently is.
- Serena of 02-03 had not yet had knee surgery
- Finally, there's a plethora of video evidence that Serena was clearly a faster, even more athletic player in 02-03 than she is now.

This final point brings me to your serve analysis:

Serena's game has evolved into a more serve dominated game. One could argue that this is an adaptation to deal with reduced mobility and/or increasing recovery time between matches as her body gets older.
She has always had a big serve, but an increased focus on hitting her targets at top speed allows her to not expend as much energy on her service games.


Not another muscular power player please. Someone who doesn't rely too much on fitness. Think Federer, Graf, and Henin.

2 things:
- Serena is far from being simply a muscular power player.
- Federer, Graf and Henin would not be who they are without their exceptional fitness.

It sound like you want a player who is very fit, athletic, has power but also variety of shot. I would say this describes Serena as well as Henin.

Londoner
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:27 PM
Ridcicule by the haters and trolls...like I care ;)

But you probably think that the RG final 02 was a great match because your fave won it :spit:
And that match was obviously only an example. 2002 had lots of bad matches and injured top players (like Hingis, Davenport). Hell, Venus couldn't even hit a proper second serve for half of the season :o

But you do care and get quite unpleasant about it! And I dont understand why! The information in Spencer Carlos' post and others like them is pretty comprehensive and undeniable yet you constantly wish to deny the facts!

mykarma
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:30 PM
The point @10:38, Serena's movement is breathtaking:eek::worship:
How in the hell did Serena track that down!?? Even Jennifer was in awe
Those rallies were breath-taking. :hearts:

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:33 PM
Being a Caro fan is very easy these days since she has just finished another season as #1. :shrug: She would have never gotten there if she had played like the players did in that RG final, though...
Not its not easy.

You have to defend day in day out the medriocricy at the big events from the world number one. :lol:

That ranking is just a number, her being number one does not means she is the best player in the world, as she gets beaten time after time when it matters the most. But its ok, the ranking points seems to matter the most for most of Carotards.

Caro haters like me love the fact that Wozniacki has the worst results of a year end number one player in the biggest 5 events in tennis that in 2010 and 2011. And she keeps "improving" on that :p :facepalm:
:wavey:

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:40 PM
But you do care and get quite unpleasant about it! And I dont understand why! The information in Spencer Carlos' post and others like them is pretty comprehensive and undeniable yet you constantly wish to deny the facts!


I'm only stating my opinions on this forum. :shrug: And I haven't seen any facts which would dismiss them. :shrug:
And I am only unpleasant to those who deserve it.


Not its not easy.

You have to defend day in day out the medriocricy at the big events from the world number one. :lol:

That ranking is just a number, her being number one does not means she is the best player in the world, as she gets beaten time after time when it matters the most. But its ok, the ranking points seems to matter the most for most of Carotards.

:wavey:


Yeah, her ranking is just a number, no need to bash her or defend her because for this. And I can only speak for myself but I know that there are more important things than ranking points.

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:40 PM
Ridcicule by the haters and trolls...like I care ;)

But you probably think that the RG final 02 was a great match because your fave won it :spit:
And that match was obviously only an example. 2002 had lots of bad matches and injured top players (like Hingis, Davenport). Hell, Venus couldn't even hit a proper second serve for half of the season :o

:lol: You sure you don't care, Matty?! Come on..deep down you wish that Caro could just win ONE major, at least reach another final at a major..just to shut up everybody. It can't be much defending the indefensible all the time.

'02 Rg final wasn't Serena vs Vee's greatest match..but that's for obvious reasons. Put the Maleeva's, the Radwanska's against each other and you wouldn't get a classic either, so stop hating. It makes you look sad and pathetic.

And today is much better? The no.1 didn't reach the final at 5 of the biggest tournaments of the year! :help:

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:40 PM
You offer no evidence of Serena or Pova being faster now than before. Just a blind assertion.
- One can look at Serena of 2002-2003 and see that she was a physical specimen and lighter than she currently is.
- Serena of 02-03 had not yet had knee surgery
- Finally, there's a plethora of video evidence that Serena was clearly a faster, even more athletic player in 02-03 than she is now.

This final point brings me to your serve analysis:

Serena's game has evolved into a more serve dominated game. One could argue that this is an adaptation to deal with reduced mobility and/or increasing recovery time between matches as her body gets older.
She has always had a big serve, but an increased focus on hitting her targets at top speed allows her to not expend as much energy on her service games.




2 things:
- Serena is far from being simply a muscular power player.
- Federer, Graf and Henin would not be who they are without their exceptional fitness.

It sound like you want a player who is very fit, athletic, has power but also variety of shot. I would say this describes Serena as well as Henin.
The speed difference is nothing more than the evolve of racket tecnology.

Serena of course became a better server or at least in Wimbledon 2010 it was a peak serving performance... But the speed difference is not that she is stonger or putting more effort on the serve, its just the racket tecnology that improved that.

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:42 PM
Yeah, her ranking is just a number, no need to bash her or defend her because for this. And I can only speak for myself but I know that there are more important things than ranking points.
It really does not look like its your case Matt :eek:

And you know that i appreciate you.. ;)

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:50 PM
:lol: You sure you don't care, Matty?! Come on..deep down you wish that Caro could just win ONE major, at least reach another final at a major..just to shut up everybody. It can't be much defending the indefensible all the time.

'02 Rg final wasn't Serena vs Vee's greatest match..but that's for obvious reasons. Put the Maleeva's, the Radwanska's against each other and you wouldn't get a classic either, so stop hating. It makes you look sad and pathetic.

And today is much better? The no.1 didn't reach the final at 5 of the biggest tournaments of the year! :help:


I am not claiming that today is "much better". But I refuse to glorify the past. In 2001 during the "great era" we also had a number who didn't reach a single Slam final all year. Similar things happened in 2004 and 2005 (not only Lindsay but also Momo). In 2003 we had a number one who played like crap in all Slam finals (Kim).

And yeah, of course I wish that Caro will win a Slam soon. But I'm wishing that as a fan for Caro and not because of the haters who have nothing better to do than bash the #1-player on a tennis forum.

hingisGOAT
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:50 PM
another stat i like to point out... venus hit a 128mph serve in 1998... no top player, other than her sister, has been able to match that, even with 15 years of improving technology! so where is the "improvement" in power? i don't see it!

(nevermind that players are less athletic, have less variety, footspeed etc.)

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:52 PM
I am not claiming that today is "much better". But I refuse to glorify the past. In 2001 during the "great era" we also had a number who didn't reach a single Slam final all year. Similar things happened in 2004 and 2005 (not only Lindsay but also Momo). In 2003 we had a number one who played like crap in all Slam finals (Kim).

And yeah, of course I wish that Caro will win a Slam soon. But I'm wishing that as a fan for Caro and not because of the haters who have nothing better to do than bash the #1-player on a tennis forum.

Fair enough..now we're talking sense. ;)

Moveyourfeet
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:56 PM
The speed difference is nothing more than the evolve of racket tecnology.

Serena of course became a better server or at least in Wimbledon 2010 it was a peak serving performance... But the speed difference is not that she is stonger or putting more effort on the serve, its just the racket tecnology that improved that.

Yeah, I wanted to take that into account, but I'm not convinced that the racquet technology from 02 till now would make that much difference.
Someone like MacEnroe serves harder now (in his 50s) than he did when he played. That is obviously racquet technology.

However, Serena has always played with a high-powered racquet. In 02, she played with the Wilson Hyper Hammer 6.2 Oversize (skunk). 110 sq in, head heavy balance and relatively light at 9.6 oz.

Now she plays with the BLX Blade, 104 sq in, head light balance and heavier at 10.7 ounces.
The BLX blade is lower-powered compared to the hyper hammer, so it will actually take a bit more effort to achieve the same speed on serve and groundstrokes with the Blade than the hyper hammer.

It is a more control oriented racquet and Serena herself commented as such when she won the 07 AO using the blacked-out blade.

Londoner
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:58 PM
And I am only unpleasant to those who deserve it.

Ooh, get her! ;)

Matt01
Oct 29th, 2011, 09:58 PM
And you know that i appreciate you.. ;)


I know. ;) And I appreciate bandabou even though he's an evil Serena fan! :eek: :lol:

Moveyourfeet
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:05 PM
another stat i like to point out... venus hit a 128mph serve in 1998... no top player, other than her sister, has been able to match that, even with 15 years of improving technology! so where is the "improvement" in power? i don't see it!


Most racquet 'technology' advances are mere gimmicks to get people to buy new racquets. Most ATP players are playing with racquets they used as younger players just painted to look like the new versions.

Obviously there are major differences in wooden/ceramic/aluminium racquets and graphite composite racquets of today, but within the graphite composite racquets, each technology, whether it be o-zones, tungsten, cortex etc make negligible difference.

hingisGOAT
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:11 PM
Most racquet 'technology' advances are mere gimmicks to get people to buy new racquets. Most ATP players are playing with racquets they used as younger players just painted to look like the new versions.

Obviously there are major differences in wooden/ceramic/aluminium racquets and graphite composite racquets of today, but within the graphite composite racquets, each technology, whether it be o-zones, tungsten, cortex etc make negligible difference.

Interesting. I was wondering why I haven't seen the improvement in power that others have claimed to see. Has string technology significantly improved recently?

spencercarlos
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:12 PM
Most racquet 'technology' advances are mere gimmicks to get people to buy new racquets. Most ATP players are playing with racquets they used as younger players just painted to look like the new versions.

Obviously there are major differences in wooden/ceramic/aluminium racquets and graphite composite racquets of today, but within the graphite composite racquets, each technology, whether it be o-zones, tungsten, cortex etc make negligible difference.
No they are not.. I play tennis quite a lot, and play decently well and the racket tecnology has advanced quite a much even since 2002/2003. Of course nothing as dramatic as changing from wood.... But its quite amazing how much pace and control you can generate with today's frames.

Moveyourfeet
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:16 PM
Interesting. I was wondering why I haven't seen the improvement in power that others have claimed to see. Has string technology significantly improved recently?

String tech jumped with the advent of polyester strings which happened a number of years ago. However, these strings are for spin and not power and are not in widespread use in WTA. They are used more in ATP.

Serena for instance has used a full stringbed of natural gut throughout her career, so nothing has changed on that front.

denny5576
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:18 PM
The speed difference is nothing more than the evolve of racket tecnology.

Kim Clijsters USO 1/4F 1/2F F:
2003 Average 1st Serve Speed 151 153 151
2010 Average 1st Serve Speed 154 154 156

Moveyourfeet
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:22 PM
No they are not.. I play tennis quite a lot, and play decently well and the racket tecnology has advanced quite a much even since 2002/2003. Of course nothing as dramatic as changing from wood.... But its quite amazing how much pace and control you can generate with today's frames.

You are a dream for racquet manufacturers.
These vague asserstions that "racket tecnology has advanced quite a much even since 2002/2003" mean nothing if you can't specify which technology has influenced what part of the game.
Again, specifically Serena's racquet today is actually lower-powered than her racquet in 2002/2003 so if anything she should be hitting with less power. (Which she is on her groundstrokes).

I don't want to hijack the thread with endless debate about racquet tech, so we can continue in PM if you want.

sabandborg
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:39 PM
Old men long for the past, young men look to the future.

The world aint coming to an end tomorrow, ebb & flow is natural chicken littles.

TF proudly hosting the most whiny brats since its beginnings.:lol::lol::lol:

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 10:44 PM
I know. ;) And I appreciate bandabou even though he's an evil Serena fan! :eek: :lol:

:lol: Ah Matty.and you know I appreciate too. Even when Juju was still playing. :p:hug:

sammy01
Oct 29th, 2011, 11:03 PM
Yeah, I wanted to take that into account, but I'm not convinced that the racquet technology from 02 till now would make that much difference.
Someone like MacEnroe serves harder now (in his 50s) than he did when he played. That is obviously racquet technology.

However, Serena has always played with a high-powered racquet. In 02, she played with the Wilson Hyper Hammer 6.2 Oversize (skunk). 110 sq in, head heavy balance and relatively light at 9.6 oz.

Now she plays with the BLX Blade, 104 sq in, head light balance and heavier at 10.7 ounces.
The BLX blade is lower-powered compared to the hyper hammer, so it will actually take a bit more effort to achieve the same speed on serve and groundstrokes with the Blade than the hyper hammer.

It is a more control oriented racquet and Serena herself commented as such when she won the 07 AO using the blacked-out blade.

given serena's racket is now 1.1 ounces (that is well over 10%) heavier as you have just pointed out this would make the racket more powerful on serve. as for the exact balance/weight of serena's rackets no one will truely know as she will no doubt have them specified just for her liking. in its crudest form years ago sampras used to stick lead tape on the end of his rackets to make them heavier. i'm sure in this day and age the same things are done just in not such crude fashions. however i doubt you would ever hear about it as racket companies would never want the general public to know the racket they are buying isn't the one the pros are actually using as theirs have been modified.

the fact that serena now uses a less powerful racket and smaller head shows racket technology must have moved on a bit in those years, as why on earth would she change? unless the rackets have become slightly more powerful over time and she has compensated for that by now using a racket geared more towards control.

Matze
Oct 29th, 2011, 11:05 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcwsFjgihd0

Even though I love watching some players of the new generation and they get me excited (Petkovic, Lisicki, Kvitova), but I honestly think these players are not close to being this exciting as the match linked above for example. The pure talent, athletisism, mental toughness and sheer will of players like Williams, Williams, Capriati, Davenport, Seles, Clijsters, Hingis etc is unrivaled and will never be seen in the future!!!

Moveyourfeet
Oct 30th, 2011, 12:41 AM
given serena's racket is now 1.1 ounces (that is well over 10%) heavier as you have just pointed out this would make the racket more powerful on serve.

Not really. A heavier racquet has a higher swingweight, so you will have to swing faster than normal to achieve the same pace.

however i doubt you would ever hear about it as racket companies would never want the general public to know the racket they are buying isn't the one the pros are actually using as theirs have been modified.

they must not care very much because Henin's Wilson BLX tour racquet (in her comeback) was actually her Wilson Hammer racquet. You could clearly see powerholes in the racquet head, which had been removed from Wilson racquets in the very early 2000s.

the fact that serena now uses a less powerful racket and smaller head shows racket technology must have moved on a bit in those years, as why on earth would she change?

To be more consistent? Because Wilson paid her to use a racquet that they wanted to advertise?
The difference in her racquets is not related to racquet technology. They are both graphite composite racquets. They just have different specifications. You are confusing the 2.

sammy01
Oct 30th, 2011, 12:49 AM
Not really. A heavier racquet has a higher swingweight, so you will have to swing faster than normal to achieve the same pace.



they must not care very much because Henin's Wilson BLX tour racquet (in her comeback) was actually her Wilson Hammer racquet. You could clearly see powerholes in the racquet head, which had been removed from Wilson racquets in the very early 2000s.



To be more consistent? Because Wilson paid her to use a racquet that they wanted to advertise?
The difference in her racquets is not related to racquet technology. They are both graphite composite racquets. They just have different specifications. You are confusing the 2.

but didn't the story go that wilson were making a racket for federer at the oz open 2007 and serena played with it and liked it, i doubt wilson tell serena what racket to use, they just paint it whatever colour they want.

any racket that is 11.5% heavier than the previous one would increase power, no matter how it was weighted. that is a huge change in weight.