PDA

View Full Version : Myskina: "the most crafty player of the post-Hingis era"


tennischick
Dec 1st, 2004, 02:38 AM
Anastasia Myskina is "the most crafty player of the post-Hingis era" :worship: :worship: sez Bob Larson. i agree :cool:

then he goes on to defend Myskina against all her latest attackers:
We've heard people make really nasty remarks about Myskina and her threat to boycott if Maria Sharapova is on the Russian Fed Cup team. Or, rather, if Sharapova's father is in the vicinity. Knowing Myskina (and one of our writers has met her three times), it's hard to believe that it's just pique on Myskina's part -- and it's noteworthy that Larisa Neiland, who has no reason to resent Sharapova, supports Myskina regarding Yuri Sharapov. But pique or not, it's hard to imagine Russia improving its team by trading in Myskina for Sharapova.... :worship: :worship: :worship:

WorldWar24
Dec 1st, 2004, 02:46 AM
Myskina seems like a really good person, she is very nice girl. She praised Maria all the time, she said all the time that she was going to be huge. Yuri must have really offended her. I feel sorry for Maria, coz she's still a kid and she has to be on her dad's side

GoDominique
Dec 1st, 2004, 02:51 AM
I agree that she is very intelligent player, but mentally she's several leagues below Martina.

Martina played intelligent tennis consistently day in day out. Nastya plays braindead tennis way too often.
Martina trounced weak opponents. Nastya often needs 3 sets.
Martina had strong nerves (until ...) and didn't choke. Nastya hasn't, and does.

So the main difference is that Nastya can't bring on her A-game consistently enough.
She could be no.1 right now if she had done it more often this year.

Zhao
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:14 AM
I agree that she is very intelligent player, but mentally she's several leagues below Martina.

Martina played intelligent tennis consistently day in day out. Nastya plays braindead tennis way too often.
Martina trounced weak opponents. Nastya often needs 3 sets.
Martina had strong nerves (until ...) and didn't choke. Nastya hasn't, and does.

So the main difference is that Nastya can't bring on her A-game consistently enough.
She could be no.1 right now if she had done it more often this year.

this could all change in 2005
we saw how she easily dispatched her opponents in the fed cup finals....;)

Jakeev
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:21 AM
I agree that she is very intelligent player, but mentally she's several leagues below Martina.

Martina played intelligent tennis consistently day in day out. Nastya plays braindead tennis way too often.
Martina trounced weak opponents. Nastya often needs 3 sets.
Martina had strong nerves (until ...) and didn't choke. Nastya hasn't, and does.

So the main difference is that Nastya can't bring on her A-game consistently enough.
She could be no.1 right now if she had done it more often this year.
She is definitely overrated as a crafty player. But she is speedy and obviously knows how to create the shots when she needs them.

But sorry folks she is no Martina Hingis.

Rtael
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:24 AM
She is definitely overrated as a crafty player. But she is speedy and obviously knows how to create the shots when she needs them.

But sorry folks she is no Martina Hingis.
No one said she was.

Junex
Dec 1st, 2004, 07:05 AM
this could all change in 2005
we saw how she easily dispatched her opponents in the fed cup finals....;)


Yeah!
easily dispathed Dechy & Golovin. :rolleyes:

Oh yes...they were her contenders for becoming #1 come 2005.

I like Myskina but with your kind of logic, i dnt think she could be #1 any sooner.

Dava
Dec 1st, 2004, 07:23 AM
Id have the agree, Ive always said her game stlye was Hingis-lyte in terms of craftyness...she does apply more power then Martina in my opinion (though Martina was a great counter puncher).

jrm
Dec 1st, 2004, 10:24 AM
Isn't JHH the craftiest player???

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 10:56 AM
Isn't JHH the craftiest player???

Well, she is, but Justine is also too strong to be compared to Hingis or Nastya. I mean Justine is like ten centimeters smaller than Nastya, but sheīs way stronger built. So, I guess thatīs the reason why people would hardly compare Justine to Martina...itīs definetly not meant in a negative or disrespectful way if they donīt ;)

Justine is a class of her own :worship:

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 11:01 AM
I agree that she is very intelligent player, but mentally she's several leagues below Martina.

Martina played intelligent tennis consistently day in day out. Nastya plays braindead tennis way too often.
Martina trounced weak opponents. Nastya often needs 3 sets.
Martina had strong nerves (until ...) and didn't choke. Nastya hasn't, and does.

So the main difference is that Nastya can't bring on her A-game consistently enough.
She could be no.1 right now if she had done it more often this year.

Right, thatīs what I think as well. There are definetly moments where she just stops playing her intelligent game out of reasons no one understands (neither does she I guess), thatīs when the famous choking-part starts and this happens way too often.

For me personally it is very honourable to always hear those comparisons between those two fave players of mine, but Nastya does need to play even more intelligent and better to be named Hingis the second, BUT I have the feeling that 2005 will be an even more succesful year for Nastya than the last one was, I am pretty sure about this ;)

sartrista7
Dec 1st, 2004, 11:40 AM
She is definitely overrated as a crafty player. But she is speedy and obviously knows how to create the shots when she needs them.

But sorry folks she is no Martina Hingis.

:retard: "Closest thing to Hingis in the top ten" does not = "reincarnation of Martina Hingis". And she is the best tactician on tour.

Instead of calling her Hingis-lite, I might call her Hingis-plus: she's not as crafty on court, but she has a weight of shot which Hingis didn't which enables her to cope with power-hitters.

GoDominique is dead on as well.

Experimentee
Dec 1st, 2004, 11:42 AM
Nastya isnt very intelligent on the court. Its ridiculous to compare her to Hingis. Just because she doesnt have as much power as others doesnt mean she has to be more intelligent.

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 11:52 AM
Nastya isnt very intelligent on the court. Its ridiculous to compare her to Hingis. Just because she doesnt have as much power as others doesnt mean she has to be more intelligent.

I forgot...whenever she plays, her opponent handed her the win cause they all had a bad day :p ...lucky girl!

Truthwillout
Dec 1st, 2004, 12:56 PM
Well, she is, but Justine is also too strong to be compared to Hingis or Nastya. I mean Justine is like ten centimeters smaller than Nastya, but sheīs way stronger built. So, I guess thatīs the reason why people would hardly compare Justine to Martina...itīs definetly not meant in a negative or disrespectful way if they donīt ;)

Justine is a class of her own :worship:

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Nimi
Dec 1st, 2004, 01:01 PM
Yeah, I honestly dont understand why every counter-puncher is called "intelligent" :confused:
I mean, Hingis was using lobs, drop-shots, volleys and so on in her game. Myskina always stays on the base-line and never attacks, and if she does, it's out of a defensive stance, or with a weight of a shot. That is NOT intelligent tennis, that's plain counter-punching, at times mixed with some power tennis. Myskina and Hingis are not similar at anything really in my own mind.

DevilishAttitude
Dec 1st, 2004, 02:52 PM
When Myskina plays well she's using every shot in the book like Hingis :worship:

When she's not she tries to hit the ball at 1,000,000 miles per hour and makes tons of errors which is why lower ranked players can beat her :o

Fingon
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:00 PM
Anastasia Myskina is "the most crafty player of the post-Hingis era" :worship: :worship: sez Bob Larson. i agree :cool:

then he goes on to defend Myskina against all her latest attackers:
:worship: :worship: :worship:
:retard:

Fingon
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:01 PM
Yeah, I honestly dont understand why every counter-puncher is called "intelligent" :confused:
I mean, Hingis was using lobs, drop-shots, volleys and so on in her game. Myskina always stays on the base-line and never attacks, and if she does, it's out of a defensive stance, or with a weight of a shot. That is NOT intelligent tennis, that's plain counter-punching, at times mixed with some power tennis. Myskina and Hingis are not similar at anything really in my own mind.
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Fingon
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:02 PM
Nastya isnt very intelligent on the court. Its ridiculous to compare her to Hingis. Just because she doesnt have as much power as others doesnt mean she has to be more intelligent.
:worship: :worship:

Dawn Marie
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:10 PM
Well if Myskina was around in 1997-1999 I think she would have hung in there with Marty and won a slam or two. Martina had all the shots in the book, but yet after 1999 she didn't use them as much. She became a counterpuncher. I guess it depends on who is in the field at the time.

I did see a match where Myskina beat Martina at her own game, they both played all the shots in the book.

I mean Myskina is no Hingis, but it is Myskina who is coping with todays game and won a French Open title.

I want Martina to come back so I can see how well she copes with today's game. Which is what it is about.

goldenlox
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:18 PM
Sveta was asked to compare Myskina and Hingis this summer. She said Myskina runs, Hingis makes you run.
Anastasia has great court coverage, and when she is on her game, she can give anyone trouble.

People don't know that Anastasia only won one match at RG in her whole career until this year.
And she won seven matches this year.

I think Anastasia is just coming into her own. Just starting to get confident against top players.

I think her best tennis is still in her future.

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:21 PM
Well if Myskina was around in 1997-1999 I think she would have hung in there with Marty and won a slam or two. Martina had all the shots in the book, but yet after 1999 she didn't use them as much. She became a counterpuncher. I guess it depends on who is in the field at the time.

I did see a match where Myskina beat Martina at her own game, they both played all the shots in the book.

I mean Myskina is no Hingis, but it is Myskina who is coping with todays game and won a French Open title.

I want Martina to come back so I can see how well she copes with today's game. Which is what it is about.

:worship: ...using this a lot in this thread, arenīt we? :D

Well, according to the WTA, Nastya and her somewhat stupid unintelligent game ( :scratch: ) is listed twice as Best Win of 2004 and if you count in that Olympics SF, sheīs even listed in three matches out of five! Coincidence?

http://www.wtatour.com/newsroom/stories/bestof04_series1_rx.asp

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:23 PM
Sveta was asked to compare Myskina and Hingis this summer. She said Myskina runs, Hingis makes you run.
Anastasia has great court coverage, and when she is on her game, she can give anyone trouble.

People don't know that Anastasia only won one match at RG in her whole career until this year.
And she won seven matches this year.

I think Anastasia is just coming into her own. Just starting to get confident against top players.

I think her best tennis is still in her future.

:worship: ...and again! :worship:

the cat
Dec 1st, 2004, 03:50 PM
I don't really see the Myskina - Hingis connection. Myskina hits a flat and hard ball but Hingis didn't. Myskina is faster than Hingis while Martina had the innate ability to be int he right place at the right time. And Myskina regualrly has mental meltdowns while Hingis rarely has any. Myskina doesn't look powerful but she has sneaky power as Maria Sharapova says of her. But both Myskina and Hingis share the quality of being resourceful on the court.

There will be alot of pressure on Myskina next year and it will be interesting to see if she can handle it. If she was she should be #1 on the WTA computer at some point in 2005.

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:21 PM
Pressure is more on Maria than on Myskina.....Mariaīs the one whom many think has the most upside, while Myskina seems to be a flash in the pan, for most people anyways.

Good point about how Martina is the one who makes people run most of the time....

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:36 PM
Pressure is more on Maria than on Myskina.....Mariaīs the one whom many think has the most upside, while Myskina seems to be a flash in the pan, for most people anyways.

Good point about how Martina is the one who makes people run most of the time....
GOD U ARE SO FREAKIN OBSESSED with Maria
THE THREAD IS ABOUT Myskina Bein the CRaftiest Player
but then U Say Pressure is more on MARIA
GET OVER HER ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :o

GoDominique
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:37 PM
Yeah, I honestly dont understand why every counter-puncher is called "intelligent" :confused:
I mean, Hingis was using lobs, drop-shots, volleys and so on in her game. Myskina always stays on the base-line and never attacks, and if she does, it's out of a defensive stance, or with a weight of a shot. That is NOT intelligent tennis, that's plain counter-punching, at times mixed with some power tennis. Myskina and Hingis are not similar at anything really in my own mind.
It's too simple to call Nastya just a counterpuncher.

It LOOKS that way, but I think it's more. People underestimate her.

For example when she beat Lindsay in LA: most people here said it was Lindsay who lost that match, not Nastya who won it. Same for FO against Venus.

But in fact it was Nastya's well-executed gameplan that won her the match. Which is giving the power-players no angles, attacking their weak shots and giving them little room for winners, so they never really get to dominate Nastya and get frustrated after a while.

Just because she doesn't use much spin or variation doesn't mean she's just a brainless counterpuncher.

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:37 PM
Yeah, I honestly dont understand why every counter-puncher is called "intelligent" :confused:
I mean, Hingis was using lobs, drop-shots, volleys and so on in her game. Myskina always stays on the base-line and never attacks, and if she does, it's out of a defensive stance, or with a weight of a shot. That is NOT intelligent tennis, that's plain counter-punching, at times mixed with some power tennis. Myskina and Hingis are not similar at anything really in my own mind.
:worship:

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:38 PM
Sveta was asked to compare Myskina and Hingis this summer. She said Myskina runs, Hingis makes you run.
Anastasia has great court coverage, and when she is on her game, she can give anyone trouble.

People don't know that Anastasia only won one match at RG in her whole career until this year.
And she won seven matches this year.

I think Anastasia is just coming into her own. Just starting to get confident against top players.

I think her best tennis is still in her future.
:worship:

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:39 PM
GOD U ARE SO FREAKIN OBSESSED with Maria
THE THREAD IS ABOUT Myskina Bein the CRaftiest Player
but then U Say Pressure is more on MARIA
GET OVER HER ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :o

Cheo.....but then again I wasnīt talking to you either, was I?

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:41 PM
It's too simple to call Nastya just a counterpuncher.

It LOOKS that way, but I think it's more. People underestimate her.

For example when she beat Lindsay in LA: most people here said it was Lindsay who lost that match, not Nastya who won it. Same for FO against Venus.

But in fact it was Nastya's well-executed gameplan that won her the match. Which is giving the power-players no angles, attacking their weak shots and giving them little room for winners, so they never really get to dominate Nastya and get frustrated after a while.

Just because she doesn't use much spin or variation doesn't mean she's just a brainless counterpuncher.

Uhum....if it was all about counter-punching then Anna S, Amanda C, Ai sugiyama, etc.....they all would be beating top players and winning majors too, no?

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:42 PM
Cheo.....but then again I wasnīt talking to you either, was I?
Obviously U weren't Talkin to ME
BUT TRy to STAY ON the THREAD SUBJECT!!!!!!!!!!
GET IT TOGETHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mr. ANti EVery FREAKIN Player BESIDES SERENA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

shap_half
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:49 PM
I love Anastasia, but I don't think she's the craftiest player since Hingis. She really doesn't do much except get every ball back and wait for the error of her opponent. Yes, she hits some great winners and can really juice up the pace on her shots, but I don't know if I would call her natural game crafty.

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:51 PM
I love Anastasia, but I don't think she's the craftiest player since Hingis. She really doesn't do much except get every ball back and wait for the error of her opponent. Yes, she hits some great winners and can really juice up the pace on her shots, but I don't know if I would call her natural game crafty.
I AGREE :worship:

Martian KC
Dec 1st, 2004, 04:55 PM
In all defense of Myskina, she is coping with the game TODAY. I do not think Martina's game can challenge any top players these days and I don't think it can ever again. Martina even changed her game post 1999.

What Myskina does well is run down every possible ball. I think she's more of a ASV than Hingis.:p

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:14 PM
Obviously U weren't Talkin to ME
BUT TRy to STAY ON the THREAD SUBJECT!!!!!!!!!!
GET IT TOGETHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mr. ANti EVery FREAKIN Player BESIDES SERENA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D


:lol: whatever, mr. pro every freaking player BUT Serena....

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:17 PM
:lol: whatever, mr. pro every freaking player BUT Serena....
:lol: WHATEVEr Mr. I LOve to MENTION MARIA EVERY CHANCE I GET!!

Fingon
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:20 PM
What Myskina does well is run down every possible ball. I think she's more of a ASV than Hingis.:p
:yeah:

For Daily Use
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:42 PM
She couldn't be as dumb as Hingis, that's for sure!

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:48 PM
:lol: WHATEVEr Mr. I LOve to MENTION MARIA EVERY CHANCE I GET!!

:lol: about the new sig...and STILL couldnīt reach the F, let alone win, at those tournaments....Serena DID @the yec.

Hey...how come you didnīt post in my thread when I asked what Serena can do to win against Maria or Alfajeffsterīs thread with a little advice for babygirl?

Seems to spend most of your time in threads NON-related to Serena....

fammmmedspin
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:51 PM
It's too simple to call Nastya just a counterpuncher.

It LOOKS that way, but I think it's more. People underestimate her.

For example when she beat Lindsay in LA: most people here said it was Lindsay who lost that match, not Nastya who won it. Same for FO against Venus.

But in fact it was Nastya's well-executed gameplan that won her the match. Which is giving the power-players no angles, attacking their weak shots and giving them little room for winners, so they never really get to dominate Nastya and get frustrated after a while.

Just because she doesn't use much spin or variation doesn't mean she's just a brainless counterpuncher.
So true. She obviously isn't an offensive player like Davenport or Serena but you take the offensive in different ways. You hit to people's shots as you work out what they can't do, if they love lemgth and speed they get short and slow - watch a big hitter belt a slow short ball into the net or over the line if you do it right. Its judo rather than boxing and guerilla war rather than the Somme. As Sun Tsu tells us, the way to beat a more powerful opponent is to run them down, outlast them, frustrate their plans, target their weaknesses and force their collapse - they play your way not you theirs.You defeat them in the head - hit with llindsay her way and lose in straights. Hit the ball to her forehand when its missing, get all her balls back, move her around , pass her or lob her when she moves forward, give her slow balls when she wants speed, watch her get frustrated and down on herself, watch her think about losing... and you beat he world number 1 twice in a row.. Ho Chi Minh wasn't a counterpuncher. either.

That aside Myskina's attacking game is pretty relentless - the shots keep on coming, to places unexpected at variable speed. When she does hit it she can hit extremely hard which can be more effective than just blasting every ball and setting a pattern. ASV and Martina never had that offensive power - watch what is a fast moving backhand from Martina and then one from Myskina. Worryingly for the rest of the field , if you watched the Fed Cup she's now trying attacking the net with a very fast moving angled volley after pulling the opponent wide with a wide serve.

As you pointed out the difference between her and Martina was that Martina was more consistent - thats partly the opposition but largely mental. If you watch the wrong matches in 2004 (USO, Wimbledon, last set v Serena at YEC, last set v Justine at Athens)) you would think she was an inconsistent counterpuncher. Watch the Fed Cup or Moscow or the first set V Justine at the Olympics and she is an attacking player. Consistency though has also got something to do with success and you could argue Nastya is going in the right direction there wheras Martina regressed after some bad defeats. Nastya has the advantage that the players with the the big weapons now have rustier ones and she is faster than Martina when they do manage to hit something big in court.

Bottom line - Nastya is growing the ability to pull it out when it matters - she made it at the FO and fed Cup and Moscow and against Lindsay at the YEC which is a lot better than she would have in 2003. it remains to be seen if she can do it more in 2005.

cheo23
Dec 1st, 2004, 05:54 PM
:lol: about the new sig...and STILL couldnīt reach the F, let alone win, at those tournaments....Serena DID @the yec.

Hey...how come you didnīt post in my thread when I asked what Serena can do to win against Maria or Alfajeffsterīs thread with a little advice for babygirl?

Seems to spend most of your time in threads NON-related to Serena....
:lol: Lindsay won 2 Tier Is....Which aRE BIG TOURnaments
ANyways..the reason I didn't Post In U're THREAD is BECause
I didn't SEE it ..the ADvice I would Tell SEREna
is NOt to Hit SHORT forehand because Maria Kills them
HMMMMMMMM...Don't HIt Way too Many Unforced ERRors
MOve Maria Around
Thats about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 06:02 PM
:lol: Lindsay won 2 Tier Is....Which aRE BIG TOURnaments
ANyways..the reason I didn't Post In U're THREAD is BECause
I didn't SEE it ..the ADvice I would Tell SEREna
is NOt to Hit SHORT forehand because Maria Kills them
HMMMMMMMM...Don't HIt Way too Many Unforced ERRors
MOve Maria Around
Thats about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Of course you didnīt see it....tell you why? Because you AINīT a fan, thatīs why.

EVERY other known Serena-fan posted in the thread and a so-called big-fan like you didnīt see it? :haha: :rolls: Itīs cool though, cheo....

Fingon
Dec 1st, 2004, 06:12 PM
what I don't get is how people read so much into fed cup matches against opponnents outside the top 20 :confused:

sartrista7
Dec 1st, 2004, 06:36 PM
what I don't get is how people read so much into fed cup matches against opponnents outside the top 20 :confused:

I don't see anyone in this thread doing that particularly, but it was more impressive than you make out for a few reasons:

1) Pressure - with Sveta nervous and losing both of her matches, there was unexpected pressure on Nastya, as the No 1 of the team, to perform
2) Redemption - the last time she'd played for her country it was pretty disastrous, as the terrible slump after her Olympic loss testified.
3) Dechy and Golovin aren't the crappy players people like you and Doc try to paint them as. Sure, they're players whom the elite should beat every time at the moment, but Dechy is only just out of the top 20 and Golovin imo is a future Slam winner, certainly a future permanent top 10 resident, maybe as soon as next year.

Really, fammmedspin and GoDominique have summed up Nastya's game best. A few myths persist - that she "just gets the ball back", which is understandable if you've just watched her RG matches, but seriously, people: straight counterpunchers do not thrive on fast surfaces, and it's worth noting that Nastya has had more superb tournament runs indoors and on grass than on clay.

Her tactics aren't necessarily based around Hingis-esque variety; more about tailoring her game precisely to her opponent's game, her opponent's form, the conditions, the court.

Also, people seem to be arguing that she's not an intelligent player because she's still inconsistent, which is bizarre: all it says is that she doesn't always bring her A game to the court, which has nothing to do with what her A game consists of. At her best, she's the best tactician on tour - and no one has yet provided a counter-example to this.

Also, to whomever stated that Hingis didn't have mental meltdowns - :retard:

bandabou
Dec 1st, 2004, 06:45 PM
Good post, sartista...come on Fingon, donīt let your bias blind your judgement. Dechy and Golovin arenīt elite players but they arenīt push-overs either.

Plus if weīre gonna go by opponents beat to assess how great a player is, then Maria has only 2 titles in her career and didnīt win those until this year.

Fingon
Dec 1st, 2004, 07:20 PM
I don't see anyone in this thread doing that particularly, but it was more impressive than you make out for a few reasons:
I did


1) Pressure - with Sveta nervous and losing both of her matches, there was unexpected pressure on Nastya, as the No 1 of the team, to perform
oh please, most of the player player worse at fedcup than normal tournaments, it's just not the same. Really only main tour matches should be used, notice I don't even think the olympics should count and my favourite won it.

2) Redemption - the last time she'd played for her country it was pretty disastrous, as the terrible slump after her Olympic loss testified.
great but what does it have to do with her being crafty or not?

3) Dechy and Golovin aren't the crappy players people like you and Doc try to paint them as. Sure, they're players whom the elite should beat every time at the moment, but Dechy is only just out of the top 20 and Golovin imo is a future Slam winner, certainly a future permanent top 10 resident, maybe as soon as next year.
please show me where I said they are crappy players. Come on sartrista, you are intelligent, what I meant is obvious, people are making up Nastya is wonderful because she beat a top 30 player. It's like me getting excited about Justine because she beat Strycova, they are simply at another level and you can't use wins over those players to evaluate a top player.
And what Golovin is in the future really has very little to do with anything, if Goloving in the future is a GS winner and Nastya beats her then, then I will recoginize that win as a great win.
It's like saying that someone who beat Steffi Graf when she was 7 was a fantastic player because later Graf was # 1.
All that matters is the level Golovin had WHEN THEY PLAYED, the level she will have in the future is completely irrelevant.


Really, fammmedspin and GoDominique have summed up Nastya's game best. A few myths persist - that she "just gets the ball back", which is understandable if you've just watched her RG matches, but seriously, people: straight counterpunchers do not thrive on fast surfaces, and it's worth noting that Nastya has had more superb tournament runs indoors and on grass than on clay.
hmmm, really? Arantxa was in the Wimbledon final twice. Amanda Coetzer has done pretty well on fast hardcourts.
And yes, she is more than just a counterpuncher, like Arantxa was, but she is nothing like Hingis, and this doesn't mean she is worse or better, she is just different, anybody that says she plays like Hingis has no clue whatsoever.


Her tactics aren't necessarily based around Hingis-esque variety; more about tailoring her game precisely to her opponent's game, her opponent's form, the conditions, the court.
hmm, I disagree, she has a kind of game that can be effective against many players, but I don't think she changes it according to the opponent, I might be wrong though.


Also, people seem to be arguing that she's not an intelligent player because she's still inconsistent, which is bizarre: all it says is that she doesn't always bring her A game to the court, which has nothing to do with what her A game consists of. At her best, she's the best tactician on tour - and no one has yet provided a counter-example to this.
well, I always was uncomfortable with that "intelligent" label, even when it was applied to Hingis, intelligence has nothing to do with it, and somehow looked like they were calling the power players stupid.
Martina IMO, didn't even have tactical sense, what she had was a lot of anticipation and the ability to recognize her opponent's weaknesses, but Martina many times was caught off guard playing against someone she knew nothing about, normally got away thanks to her natural skills, but that's hardly tactical sense.
I mean, if Serena is serving well, and can blow up her opponent in 30 minutes and she does just that, it's a pretty good tactic IMO.
And the counter-example to her being the best tactician on the court, what kind of counter-example you want? if I said that Justine is a better tactician you would not agree, it would be your opinion against my opinion, you are not saying who won more or leads the head-to-head, you are asking for an evaluation, how can anyone provide proofs about that?

Also, to whomever stated that Hingis didn't have mental meltdowns - she did starting FO 99, she was a different player from then on. that's why it's important to say which Hingis you are comparing Nastya with.
Because if you compare her with the 97-98-half of 99 Hingis, the comparisson is laughable.
If you compare her with the 2000 onward Hingis, the comparisson is probably right, but not very flattering for Nastya.

Jakeev
Dec 1st, 2004, 07:33 PM
:retard: "Closest thing to Hingis in the top ten" does not = "reincarnation of Martina Hingis". And she is the best tactician on tour.

Instead of calling her Hingis-lite, I might call her Hingis-plus: she's not as crafty on court, but she has a weight of shot which Hingis didn't which enables her to cope with power-hitters.

GoDominique is dead on as well.
Myskina is THE best tactician on tour? You best stop smoking Dawn marie's substances she grows on her balcony.........:lol: :lol:

Jakeev
Dec 1st, 2004, 07:34 PM
Yeah, I honestly dont understand why every counter-puncher is called "intelligent" :confused:
I mean, Hingis was using lobs, drop-shots, volleys and so on in her game. Myskina always stays on the base-line and never attacks, and if she does, it's out of a defensive stance, or with a weight of a shot. That is NOT intelligent tennis, that's plain counter-punching, at times mixed with some power tennis. Myskina and Hingis are not similar at anything really in my own mind.
Outstanding post!:worship:

pigam
Dec 1st, 2004, 07:38 PM
some of you should actually watch some Nastya Matches :o

Knizzle
Dec 1st, 2004, 09:11 PM
Myskina is nothing like Hingis in my opinion. Hingis for the most part during her career played on even terms with all the big hitters, she wasn't getting blasted 6-1, 6-1 by Lindsay Davenport. She may have had a few mental meltdowns, but she didn't have issues almost every match like Myskina. They are far too different to compare.

DA FOREHAND
Dec 1st, 2004, 09:19 PM
Isn't JHH the craftiest player???
No she's the cheesiest! :wavey:

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 09:52 PM
It's too simple to call Nastya just a counterpuncher.

It LOOKS that way, but I think it's more. People underestimate her.

For example when she beat Lindsay in LA: most people here said it was Lindsay who lost that match, not Nastya who won it. Same for FO against Venus.

But in fact it was Nastya's well-executed gameplan that won her the match. Which is giving the power-players no angles, attacking their weak shots and giving them little room for winners, so they never really get to dominate Nastya and get frustrated after a while.

Just because she doesn't use much spin or variation doesn't mean she's just a brainless counterpuncher.

:worship: even better and exactly my argument!!!

starr
Dec 1st, 2004, 09:53 PM
Myskina is nothing like Hingis in my opinion. Hingis for the most part during her career played on even terms with all the big hitters, she wasn't getting blasted 6-1, 6-1 by Lindsay Davenport. She may have had a few mental meltdowns, but she didn't have issues almost every match like Myskina. They are far too different to compare.
Martina did get blasted by Lindsay 6-1, 6-1. Those were painful matches for me. :(

Josh810
Dec 1st, 2004, 10:17 PM
Am I the only one that understands that we're not trying to compare her to Hingis? Or are some people saying that...

Spunky83
Dec 1st, 2004, 10:19 PM
Am I the only one that understands that we're not trying to compare her to Hingis? Or are some people saying that...

No, we said sheīs a reincarnation of her...wait, Martina is still alive...never mind ;)

AlexB
Dec 1st, 2004, 10:26 PM
the thread is "the most crafty player of the post-Hingis era" it does NOT compare her to hingis...it says during the period after hingis stopped playing, myskina is the craftiest player....whats the confusion about? its not a side to side comparison ...see post hingis ERA....thats the writers opinion (although you can define crafty many ways)....i like to think of her as one of the best movers on tour, cause if she's playing the powerful hitters and making them run, she will win..and she isn't better than hingis (yet)..she's a top tier player for sure and can hang with the top players..and don't forget im a fan of hers so she must be doing something right!

as for the fed cup debate, sure dechy is france's number 2 and golovin subbed for mauresmo, sure its a droppoff but golovin played pretty nice (and im not talking about her short short short shorts either, although she wears the best shorts on the wta tour for sure -thats a category she wins hands down) but russia just HAD to win it, and there is a different pressure for the fed cup, and if you where the russians, and if myskina ranked this win over her fo championship, then it was no stretch to say that the pressure was more than a regular tournament, if not a major (for the russian side) so it may not be pressure for a normal fed cup team, but under these circumstances and this venue, the pressure was elevated for sure (and you cant tell me you couldn't see other top 10 players losing in that same position myskina was in)

just watching the final rubber i kept thinking to myself if russia doesn't win this, her mental state will be a mess for months lol

if her body language/joy after winning is considered you can tell how much she wanted it cause myskina is usually reserved after victories...ive never seen her that animated after a win..now on to the australian open for another major

Knizzle
Dec 2nd, 2004, 01:08 AM
Martina did get blasted by Lindsay 6-1, 6-1. Those were painful matches for me. :(
She never got beaten 6-1, 6-1 by Lindsay, she nearly did in the 2000 Aussie final, but she was able to fight back a little.

tennischick
Dec 2nd, 2004, 01:11 AM
Am I the only one that understands that we're not trying to compare her to Hingis? Or are some people saying that...:worship: :worship: she is the craftiest player SINCE Hingis. which is not to say that she is a Hingis clone but that since Hingis no-one else has used such craftiness in her approach to winning. seems pretty clear and accurate to me. most current players rely on bashing, not craftiness.

cartmancop
Dec 2nd, 2004, 01:58 AM
I would say that Justine seems to be one of the smartest players on court since Hingis. She's not overpowering but uses variety like Hingis did to win points.

& don't call me a henin supporter b/c I really dislike her:D

pigam
Dec 2nd, 2004, 09:20 AM
No she's the cheesiest! :wavey:
shouldn't that be the cheat-iest :wavey:

moby
Dec 2nd, 2004, 10:01 AM
well i think it's between justine and her

but if you think about it, justine has so many weapons at her disposal (big serve, and getting bigger), incredible footspeed, very credible volleys, impressive forehand (when she's not having an off day ;)) and of course her backhand

myskina apparently doesn't. well actually she does, but we'll pretend she doesnt and just run balls down ASV style, as her detractors would have us believe. given that, you'd have to go with myskina being a better stategist because she still wins despite her lack of an obvious killer shot. she can't actually hit/blast her way out of trouble

P.S. myskina's "killer shot" like martina's, is the backhand DTL which can come at surprising times in the rally

tennnisfannn
Dec 2nd, 2004, 10:08 AM
Why do some people think it is sacriligious to compare anyone to Hingis? Hingis played some brilliant tennis but she didn't become a god after she stopped. Some hingis fans seems to have selective mememories, hingis didn't always play smart just like some people don't believe myskina is as crafty as she can be so inconsistent. In her last two or three years, Hingis was a retriever more than anything. And no she didn't not have a powder puff sort of serve, she had a decent one, she wasn't slow, she was very speedy and that is why when she injured herself, she lost one of her greatest assets, speed.
Hingis brilliance gets more glorified each day to the point that no one seems to measure up. Hingis may have stood out coz she reigned in a time when lindsay, the williams, amelie and capriati were mighty strong, she became this 'frail' thing that only had her brains to rely on. I do not deny she was a fantastic player, but her star had waned long before her injury.
Why isn't anyone thinking that amelie is the craftiest player now, she can do just about anything with the ball but there is this hesistation to think of big girls as being 'brainy' hence myskine get the 'hingis' mantle. Justine nearly did but not when she is hitting serves fastert than nalbandian.

Greenout
Dec 2nd, 2004, 10:52 AM
I don't know about this one? :lol:

Hingis herself has said and singled out Myskina, Chanda and Justine.
I think this is the best answer you can get in terms of the original
the thread question. I do believe you can see a bit of the Hingis
tactics style in all 3 players.

tennischick
Dec 3rd, 2004, 02:13 AM
i agree. altho' i still give Myskina the edge on the other two. IMO it's Myskina, JuJu and Chanda in that order. btw, when did Hingis say this?

Nimi
Dec 3rd, 2004, 04:13 PM
It's too simple to call Nastya just a counterpuncher.

It LOOKS that way, but I think it's more. People underestimate her.

For example when she beat Lindsay in LA: most people here said it was Lindsay who lost that match, not Nastya who won it. Same for FO against Venus.

But in fact it was Nastya's well-executed gameplan that won her the match. Which is giving the power-players no angles, attacking their weak shots and giving them little room for winners, so they never really get to dominate Nastya and get frustrated after a while.

Just because she doesn't use much spin or variation doesn't mean she's just a brainless counterpuncher.
Oviously she didn't get to where she is by just being a brainless counter-puncher, that's for sure. She was brilliant at times against Lindsay, putting shots directly in the corners for some awsome winners. Still, it was up to Lindsay, I think if you watched that match you simply can't say otherwise.

Still, my former post still explains what I think: Myskina's and Hingis' game barely have anything in common. Every player which doesn't count as a "power babe" will be compared to Hingis, and I think that's silly.

Nimi
Dec 3rd, 2004, 04:24 PM
Oh, yea, just to make my point clearer.
People always seek comparisons. Who was Hingis compared to? Evert? I never under-estimated Anastasya, but comparing her to Hingis is just plain wrong. How do you defy "crafty"? I bet most of you will say completely different things. Myskina's fans will compare her to Hingis to make her look good and smarter on court than she really is, and her haters will use the comparison to make her look worse and weaker than she really is. The objective posters (yes, like me, if you intended to ask) will acknowledge that the comparison is just useless, and is a waste of time. These two players are barely alike. Stop comparing players just because they're different to the majority, compare players which are actually similar. That's not the case here. People are comparing these two players because they were (and are) different than the "regular" style of play, and that is simply no base to comparison.

Oh, and if you ask me, the Hand is the smartest player on tour nowdays (for me, by a mile), and people (who once also compared her to good ol' Martina) don't compare her to Hingis anymore, because she started adding power to her game, and in some people's mind, power=idiotism and lack of brains.

Prove me wrong. Come on.

Spunky83
Dec 3rd, 2004, 04:26 PM
i agree. altho' i still give Myskina the edge on the other two. IMO it's Myskina, JuJu and Chanda in that order. btw, when did Hingis say this?

I just know that Hingis is a big fan of Nastyaīs game... ;)

Havok
Dec 3rd, 2004, 05:26 PM
Erm, isn't someone like Loit more crafty than Myskina? Mind you, she doesn't win nearly as much or achieved as much as Myskina has.:p

cheo23
Dec 3rd, 2004, 05:35 PM
Erm, isn't someone like Loit more crafty than Myskina? Mind you, she doesn't win nearly as much or achieved as much as Myskina has.:p
U're RIGHT!
WE All forgot about Little Miss Emilie LOiT!
Yeah she's More CRafty than Myskina THATS For SURE!

JCF
Dec 3rd, 2004, 05:50 PM
Myskina definately has more craft than any other player out there today - ever seen those lobs, very lleyton hewitt like. :)

She has every shot going for her,some times she doesn't execute them that well, but when she is on,she is very hard to play against.

goldenlox
Dec 3rd, 2004, 05:54 PM
I'm not sure how to tell which player is "crafty".
Anastasia has improved throughout her entire career.
She's learned over the years, and has been able to make herself a major force on the tour.
Anastasia's breakthrough win was against Hingis in New Haven.

Babolatpro880
Dec 3rd, 2004, 08:45 PM
shouldn't that be the cheat-iest :wavey:
:yeah:

pigam
Dec 3rd, 2004, 09:05 PM
:yeah:
:yeah: