PDA

View Full Version : Where did the game go wrong?


jameshazza
Jun 1st, 2012, 01:56 AM
Before Gen Suck fans go on a rant about people blasting those players, I'm not saying we're in the worst era. But we are looking like we're heading for it?

Somewhere along the line the game had to be lost in translation. From the mid-nighties til 07/08 the amount of great players we've seen is second to no era. But if you look at the most prominent teens to burst on the scene we've Venus, Serena, Hingis and Maria.

Each new generation looks at the previous one when building their game and try to improve on it. If you look at Hingis, she was a crafty and instinctive counterpuncher. But it seems that her game was misinterpreted by the coaches and players of the current gen. Counterpunching is taking a hit and landing one back, NOT running around the ring playing 'tag' all day, which is what can be described of Caro and Aga. Granted Caro has a good backhand and Aga does have variety (but it is grossly overrated by this board). The only real counterpuncher is Vika who uses the pace of big blows opponents throw at her aginst them, ROS redirecting in rallies. Although she lacks the intuition Martina had.

Now with the Williams sisters and Masha, yeah they hit the ball hard and maybe when they first broke out it was just hitting it wherever as hard as they could. But now, with Serena and Masha anyway, their game is much more based on precision despite still hitting the ball hard. It seems that the coaches of this gen. interpreted their game as 'blast anywhere and you'll win' leading to the amount of BBB's and UE Queens we have today.

Fact is there are very few players who look like they could make the top 4, and fewer who look like they could stay there for any length of time. While in a few years Vika/Aga/Masha/Petra could be one of the most consistent top 4 the tour has had, what happens next. ATM it looks like nothing. Also, with WTA restrictions on young players (which are good - Tati, Masha's shoulder etc.) there'll be no teen starlet saving the day.

Do you think the state of the tour is a direct result of mistranslating the games of past players, or are we just headed for one big-ass LULL era? Discuss.

Raiden
Jun 1st, 2012, 02:23 AM
Where did the game go wrong?Don't you want it to go wrong? Shouldn't you be happy that it is a little bit wrong?

Because the game going right means that the inconsistent top players, i.e. Vika, Petra & Aga getting consistent (like Pova)

But (as the poster Beat hinted the other day) that would result in Vika, Aga & Petra giving Masha a beatdown which they are capable of if they're consistently at their best :>)

mac47
Jun 1st, 2012, 02:29 AM
I'm perfectly happy to watch Kvitty and Aga hit gorgeous winners and clever shots against a field of mugs. Just mute the damned shrieking from the top 2 and the tour would be in a golden age, frankly.

jameshazza
Jun 1st, 2012, 02:31 AM
We're not talkin about grunting. We're talking about game, and the serious lack there will be in a few years time, and why that is?

miffedmax
Jun 1st, 2012, 02:49 AM
Masha's game is less precise than it was when she broke out earlier in the decade. It's one of the reasons she isn't as dominant as she once was.

The Dawntreader
Jun 1st, 2012, 02:51 AM
It happened shortly after the void Henin left in 2008.

Charlatan
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:02 AM
I'm perfectly happy to watch Kvitty and Aga hit gorgeous winners and clever shots against a field of mugs. Just mute the damned shrieking from the top 2 and the tour would be in a golden age, frankly.

:haha: yet your petra has not even made a final yet this season among the so called field of mugs...seek help

anyway, the tour is at least on the right track, compared to, say, wozniacki era (09-10). Top players have become more consistent, making to the late stages of almost every tournament on a constant basis.

but yes, since henin left the tour in 08, it's become a chaos with various #1 players, slameless #1 players with inconsistency.

Stonerpova
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:06 AM
It all started to go wrong when Henin retired in 08, as there was no one to take her place. The Williams sisters didn't play enough to be dominant players, Maria's shoulder saga began, and everyone who touched the #1 ranking afterward saw their career turn to shit. Safina, Jankovic, and Wozniacki reaching #1 and then failing miserably at the majors (not bashing them, it's a fact) brought things to a new low. But the tour is definitely heading in the right direction nowadays. We have a consistent top 3 or 4, but it's still wide open enough to be exciting.

jameshazza
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:15 AM
Yeah but I mean the lack of talent, sorry if phrasing is blunt, in the lower ranked girls is astonishing. You think with the amount of players they had to look up to something more would have been emulated.

Alejandrawrrr
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:56 AM
The leaders of this generation are just inferior to previous champions. Radwanska is a poor man's Hingis, Wozniacki is a homeless man's Sanchez Vicario, Vika is a poor man's Capriati and Kvitova/09-current Maria(if we're including her) are poor men's davenports. It looks like they got the idea right, but it's just apparent that all 5 of these players are lacking either the champion's spirit, natural athleticism, or both, and that will keep them from reaching the status of Serena/Venus/Hand/Myth :shrug:

sxeraserhead
Jun 1st, 2012, 04:05 AM
With Sharapova.

Yeah but I mean the lack of talent, sorry if phrasing is blunt, in the lower ranked girls is astonishing. You think with the amount of players they had to look up to something more would have been emulated.

If you look at most of the current top juniors they are shrieking one-dimensional power baseline slowpokes. Much like a certain player.

supergrunt
Jun 1st, 2012, 04:08 AM
Henin retiring shouldn't really have mattered that much. If you look at the men's side, the players winning all of the slams are a part of the younger generation.

I think that this happened because the girls in this generation grew up listening to their coaches and tennis experts on TV--mostly men who were too ignorant, angry, or apathetic towards the WTA to give an honest evaluation--say that the Williams sisters were all power and athleticism and no tactics. The girls in the younger generation internalized this and thought that all they would have to do would be to go out there and hit hard to win. That's why most of them lack the nuance of the power-player predecessors they looked up to when they were children. :shrug:

Potato
Jun 1st, 2012, 04:25 AM
The leaders of this generation are just inferior to previous champions. Radwanska is a poor man's Hingis, Wozniacki is a homeless man's Sanchez Vicario, Vika is a poor man's Capriati and Kvitova/09-current Maria(if we're including her) are poor men's davenports. It looks like they got the idea right, but it's just apparent that all 5 of these players are lacking either the champion's spirit, natural athleticism, or both, and that will keep them from reaching the status of Serena/Venus/Hand/Myth :shrug:

Yep. But I guess we had it so good for so long with the amazing Big 4 following the also exciting Hingis/Capriati/etc. generation But the tour is at least more solid than it was for the past 2 years.

The past 4 years should have been dominated by Masha/Ana/Kuznetsova/JJ/Safina but injuries for Masha and way too much unexpected (bc of Henin's retirement) pressure on the latter 4 really ruined their chances. They were supposed to slowly take the mantle but it really went AWOL.

Malva
Jun 1st, 2012, 04:46 AM
If you look at most of the current top juniors they are shrieking one-dimensional power baseline slowpokes. Much like a certain player.

This is how I see it too. I don't believe in a sudden lack of talent among juniors. I think the problem is caused by all those girls trying for the last several years to emulate 'bam-shriek-bam-shriek-bammers' instead of putting sustained effort into development of tennis skills that make one a complete tennis player. Tennis, after all, was not supposed to be about serve, athleticism, and hitting the ball with as much power as possible.

perseus2006
Jun 1st, 2012, 05:41 AM
Such a cute thread! So many posters trying so hard to shade players without naming names and failing miserably with extraordinarily inept inuendo: 'bam-shriek-bam-shriek-bammers'.

How about this assertion: "Tennis, after all, was not supposed to be about serve, athleticism, and hitting the ball with as much power as possible." Well what the hell is it about, then? Short dresses, vividly colored panties and tittie teasing as players bend over for ROS?

Tennis is a sport, it is all about athleticism, first and foremost.

The serve is the most important element in tennis, of course tennis is about the serve.

Shot making is tennis and hitting the ball with as much power as necessary to accomplish the player's intention for the stroke is the ideal situation.

I wonder if some posters can even recognize themselves when looking in a mirror.

Craig.
Jun 1st, 2012, 05:51 AM
So it's Maria's fault? :haha: Give me a fucking break.

Lyoshka80
Jun 1st, 2012, 05:58 AM
I think the biggest problem is that today women have abandoned the beauty of strategy in favor of sheer power. Women's tennis up until Hingis was all about strategy and figuring out your opponent's weaknesses. It was a physical chess match. Today, however, power tennis has overtaken everything. As a result top players focus on serving more than on anything else and keep injuring themselves in every other tournament. We've seen a few splashes of tactical tennis in Dementieva and Henin, but most players still prefer to emulate Serena, Capriati, Mauresmo style.

Stonerpova
Jun 1st, 2012, 06:15 AM
So it's Maria's fault? :haha: Give me a fucking break.

Right? :o

It's not her fault younger players wanna be like her. Imitation is supposedly the highest form of flattery. If the players emulating her want to make it they need that fighting spirit, and Maria's pretty special in that department.

Alejandrawrrr
Jun 1st, 2012, 06:19 AM
I think the biggest problem is that today women have abandoned the beauty of strategy in favor of sheer power. Women's tennis up until Hingis was all about strategy and figuring out your opponent's weaknesses. It was a physical chess match. Today, however, power tennis has overtaken everything. As a result top players focus on serving more than on anything else and keep injuring themselves in every other tournament. We've seen a few splashes of tactical tennis in Dementieva and Henin, but most players still prefer to emulate Serena, Capriati, Mauresmo style.

Serena, Capriati and Mauresmo are sheer power and don't use strategy?

Stonerpova
Jun 1st, 2012, 06:21 AM
I think the biggest problem is that today women have abandoned the beauty of strategy in favor of sheer power. Women's tennis up until Hingis was all about strategy and figuring out your opponent's weaknesses. It was a physical chess match. Today, however, power tennis has overtaken everything. As a result top players focus on serving more than on anything else and keep injuring themselves in every other tournament. We've seen a few splashes of tactical tennis in Dementieva and Henin, but most players still prefer to emulate Serena, Capriati, Mauresmo style.

I'm sorry, so Dementieva played tactical tennis and Mauresmo didn't?

Craig.
Jun 1st, 2012, 06:21 AM
Serena, Capriati and Mauresmo are sheer power and don't use strategy?

And an even bigger LOLZ at Dementieva being a tactician :lol:

Alejandrawrrr
Jun 1st, 2012, 06:29 AM
And an even bigger LOLZ at Dementieva being a tactician :lol:

Especially since her gamestyle was essentially Capriati-lite. B level offense combined with A+ level fitness and rallying skills, but with a bit less firepower than Jen. They even both had ROS as their best shot. The fact that he split them up like that is absurd :spit:

(Oh, though what Goddess Lena lacked in firepower compared to Jen she made up for with a better attitude and BANGs)

Stonerpova
Jun 1st, 2012, 06:34 AM
Especially since her gamestyle was essentially Capriati-lite. B level offense combined with A+ level fitness and rallying skills, but with a bit less firepower than Jen. They even both had ROS as their best shot. The fact that he split them up like that is absurd :spit:

They were really similar players, the biggest difference to me being fitness. Dementieva, the consummate professional, was always in tip top shape. Capriati let herself go a bit in her later years. She was still fast as hell and could compensate with her raw speed, but her fitness wasn't always A+ level.

Alejandrawrrr
Jun 1st, 2012, 07:06 AM
They were really similar players, the biggest difference to me being fitness. Dementieva, the consummate professional, was always in tip top shape. Capriati let herself go a bit in her later years. She was still fast as hell and could compensate with her raw speed, but her fitness wasn't always A+ level.

True, I suppose by "A+ fitness" I meant something more along the lines of "stamina in rallies," particularly compared to players such as WS/Lindsay/Maria/P. Pierce/Monica to varying degrees obviously, but all of whom were a notch or two above in terms of sheer offense/first strike, but a notch or several below in terms of rallying ability.

Albireo
Jun 1st, 2012, 07:08 AM
The game didn't go wrong. The players (and especially the coaches) did.

madmax
Jun 1st, 2012, 07:14 AM
sure, let's blame Maria for everything what's wrong in today's game...of ourse plenty of girls want to be like her and get all those juicy endorsement deals, while kicking ass on the court. But like thay always say - original always prevails over copycats. Those young chicks should be developing their own styles instead of mindlessly mimicking what's successful right now.

moby
Jun 1st, 2012, 07:16 AM
I think the biggest problem is that today women have abandoned the beauty of strategy in favor of sheer power. Women's tennis up until Hingis was all about strategy and figuring out your opponent's weaknesses. It was a physical chess match. Today, however, power tennis has overtaken everything. As a result top players focus on serving more than on anything else and keep injuring themselves in every other tournament. We've seen a few splashes of tactical tennis in Dementieva and Henin, but most players still prefer to emulate Serena, Capriati, Mauresmo style.

I LOL-ed.

Grigorpova
Jun 1st, 2012, 07:31 AM
I can't watch any Generation Suck players, like literally I get bored within a set..

There are exceptions of course like the woman in my avatar :worship:

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 07:53 AM
Why are people in this thread so close-minded? Tennis has quite simple rules and the game is about ability win points and subsequently games and matches. Saying that Sharapova's or Radwanska's styles are not what tennis should be about is just wrong. Within tennis rules and their physical abilities each of the has developed a style that makes them incredibly successful. Venus' technique is absolutely awful, but she made that up with supreme athletics and reflexes. Hingis wasn't nearly as athletic, but she made that up with her understanding of court.

I do agree that upcoming wave of players doesn't seem to be achieving nowhere near the amount of success some teenagers did a couple of year ago - Radwanska, Wozniacki and Azarenka are the last teenagers to hit top 10, now there's no one younger than 21 in top 20. That could suggest that they won't be as good as the current top 4 when they're 22-25 y.o., which could be a massive problem in the future. I don't know who's to blame though, probably coaches as already mentioned.

Chrissie-fan
Jun 1st, 2012, 08:08 AM
There's no problem as far as I'm concerned. Players just mature and peak later. Tennis has become physically so demanding that it's no longer a game for girls but for women.

C. Drone
Jun 1st, 2012, 08:47 AM
blaming one player for the fate of the sport must be top of the ridiculousness (i.e. Henin´s retirement, Masha´s "shriek-bamm").

Talent pool always the same, (girls not weaker or dumber than 20-30 years ago). Or even better considering the world wide recognition of tennis developed as well. But somewhere in the process there are glitches. For example, Age eligibility rule, the ranking system change in 1997, racquet technology, surface homogenization, interwebz & the Kournikova-effect, or even the disintegration of Eastern Bloc.

I wouldnt say anything went wrong. There are transition periods, its a fact.

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 08:48 AM
There's no problem as far as I'm concerned. Players just mature and peak later. Tennis has become physically so demanding that it's no longer a game for girls but for women.What's more physical about the game than it was just 5 years ago?

bobito
Jun 1st, 2012, 09:10 AM
This is how I see it too. I don't believe in a sudden lack of talent among juniors. I think the problem is caused by all those girls trying for the last several years to emulate 'bam-shriek-bam-shriek-bammers' instead of putting sustained effort into development of tennis skills that make one a complete tennis player. Tennis, after all, was not supposed to be about serve, athleticism, and hitting the ball with as much power as possible.

I think you pretty much nailed it there, though I don't think players are trying to emulate Sharapova specifically. More likely they are trying to emulate Serena Williams and not paying enough attention to the subtler aspects of her game.

shoparound
Jun 1st, 2012, 09:11 AM
When Clijsters came back :x: she played some awful tennis in majors that she won

tennisvideos
Jun 1st, 2012, 09:15 AM
The game went wrong at the end of the 70s when technology took over leading to a production line of baseline bashing clones. When I say technology I am referring to the change from natural surfaces (ie. grass and clay to hard court) as well as super sized rackets and strings that allow for tremendous power and spin.

Prior to the technology explosion we had so many different stylists and players had to resort to tactics and strategies to eek out points and matches. You saw S&V players, all court players and baselines all mixing it up - it was an exciting time in tennis. Just look at the different styles that populated the top 10 in the early to mid 70s -
* Margaret Court
* Chris Evert
* Billie-Jean King
* Evonne Goolagong
* Martina Navratilova
* Francoise Durr
* Nancy Richey
* Kerry Melville
* Betty Stove
* Virginia Wade etc

I still love tennis, but the wooden racket era was the most diverse and exciting IMO.

As for wondering where the next stars will come from ... well they will emerge. They always do .. it's just tough for younger prodigies because of the limited number of tournaments that young teenagers can play these days. They don't get the same opportunities as the youngsters like Evert, Austin, Hingis etc got in the past.

bobito
Jun 1st, 2012, 09:18 AM
The game went wrong at the end of the 70s when technology took over leading to a production line of baseline bashing clones. When I say technology I am referring to the change from natural surfaces (ie. grass and clay to hard court) as well as super sized rackets and strings that allow for tremendous power and spin.

Prior to the technology explosion we had so many different stylists and players had to resort to tactics and strategies to eek out points and matches. You saw S&V players, all court players and baselines all mixing it up - it was an exciting time in tennis. Just look at the different styles that populated the top 10 in the early to mid 70s -
* Margaret Court
* Chris Evert
* Billie-Jean King
* Evonne Goolagong
* Martina Navratilova
* Francoise Durr
* Nancy Richey
* Kerry Melville
* Betty Stove
* Virginia Wade etc

I still love tennis, but the wooden racket era was the most diverse and exciting IMO.

You make an excellent point about the surfaces. Far too many hardcourt tournaments these days and the grass is too slow and the clay too fast. It doesn't require players to learn a varied skillset.

jedw
Jun 1st, 2012, 09:20 AM
I don't agree that this is the worst era, or that it is getting worse.

But I do see a difference when I look at the mens game. All the top WTA players have strengths and also weaknesses, none of them are a Federer or a Djockovic. Somtimes though it's the differences that makes womens tennis more intersting to me.

Sick of hearing people moan about Henin or Hingis, give it a rest. :rolleyes:

Keegan
Jun 1st, 2012, 09:45 AM
I honestly think tennis is getting better. Prior to this, it was literally a shitfest with randoms running things. Yeah, they played great tennis to get there, but it wasn't great for the game. Now we have slam winner Vika on top, who has had an amazingly successful year; super-consistent Sharapova who has also had an awesome year; Radwanska who is very crafty and talented, which is a nice change from a lot of the power tennis; Kvitova who hasn't done much this year, but was an incredibly successful player towards the end of last year and many more. I personally feel there's nothing wrong with the tennis that's going on at the moment, and compared to what we've had in the past couple of years it's a relief.

doktor
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:07 AM
Surface homogenization.

Now that virtually all the courts play the same slow-medium pace the game is about not losing rather than winning.

J4m3ka
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:09 AM
The new generation all play too similarly for my liking. In 00 - 07 we had so many different styles of playing which created interesting match ups. Choking, injuries and lack of fitness are at an all time high, hinting at slightly worse athletes. Teaching the fundamentals of tennis seems to have gone out of the window - no one can serve. The main strategy seems to be retrieving and defending, which coupled with the slow down of courts I find boring to watch ALL the time, but it is sort of understandable. This a fault of WTA for surface homogenisation.

And more than all else, the girls don't have the same strong personalities we've seen in the past. They all seem to be friends (which don't get me wrong isn't a bad thing), but I personally loved the early 00s because of the intense rivalries which extended off court. Players really wanted to beat each other up badly :lol:

But yeah, Henin retiring was probably the start of the problems. Anyway.. the tour has shown signs of life this year, and it's generally been a much better year than we have seen for a bit. I am hoping by the end of 2012 some of the traits from the golden age will return.

Sam L
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:10 AM
The game went wrong at the end of the 70s when technology took over leading to a production line of baseline bashing clones. When I say technology I am referring to the change from natural surfaces (ie. grass and clay to hard court) as well as super sized rackets and strings that allow for tremendous power and spin.

Prior to the technology explosion we had so many different stylists and players had to resort to tactics and strategies to eek out points and matches. You saw S&V players, all court players and baselines all mixing it up - it was an exciting time in tennis. Just look at the different styles that populated the top 10 in the early to mid 70s -
* Margaret Court
* Chris Evert
* Billie-Jean King
* Evonne Goolagong
* Martina Navratilova
* Francoise Durr
* Nancy Richey
* Kerry Melville
* Betty Stove
* Virginia Wade etc

I still love tennis, but the wooden racket era was the most diverse and exciting IMO.

As for wondering where the next stars will come from ... well they will emerge. They always do .. it's just tough for younger prodigies because of the limited number of tournaments that young teenagers can play these days. They don't get the same opportunities as the youngsters like Evert, Austin, Hingis etc got in the past.


Excellent point. This is a game that has gone far from its roots. The scoring system is different (with tiebreaks), the racquet technology is different and only grass remains that links to the origins of the game.

A player who played lawn tennis in the 1870s time traveling to the present and watching tennis at say the US Open would not recognise the game for what it has become.

The tour also went wrong when it failed to give proper protection to the game's best player in Monica Seles. This prevented what could've been Navratilova-Evert Part II and altered the course and success and careers of all female players that came since.

To be quite honest, I don't really care anymore. There's enough good stuff in the history of this sport to care about than what is happening or what will happen because none of it really compares.

Tenis Srbija
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:20 AM
I honestly think tennis is getting better. Prior to this, it was literally a shitfest with randoms running things. Yeah, they played great tennis to get there, but it wasn't great for the game. Now we have slam winner Vika on top, who has had an amazingly successful year; super-consistent Sharapova who has also had an awesome year; Radwanska who is very crafty and talented, which is a nice change from a lot of the power tennis; Kvitova who hasn't done much this year, but was an incredibly successful player towards the end of last year and many more. I personally feel there's nothing wrong with the tennis that's going on at the moment, and compared to what we've had in the past couple of years it's a relief.

http://x.vukajlija.com/var/uploads/reactions/201205/5384/me+on+morbid.+lol+jk.+i+don+t+find+morbid+all+that _702b3b_3731147.gif?1338465513

sammy01
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:33 AM
serena and venus brought in a new level of power tennis but they had amazing athleticism to go with it. unfortunately many of the young girls that watched them and decided yep we are going to smack the hell out of the ball, both aren't as good athletes and never concentrated enough of technique, just power.

this has gradually happened over the last 5 to 7 years and the likes of pavs is the outcome. a non athletic, ball bashers with brittle technique and poor footwork. what it has also done the last 3 or 4 years is make 'pushing' a way to counter-act that. the likes of woz, aga ect have played the tour the last few years knowing the slower brittle technique of these types of players will and does break down.

so the tour is now in 2 halves, slow, brittle ball bashers who have one way to play (sharapova and kvitova) or the pushing/endless rallying of the likes of aga and vika. there is literally no players coming through who are both great athletes and nice ball strikers who can defend and attack equally well.

also the utter lack of athletic players that are coming through now is sad. forget the big 4 who were athletes out of this world, where are the dementievas and momos of the tennis world now who were 2nd tier top players but fantastic athletes?

Sam L
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:38 AM
And also getting rid of the Divisor ranking system. That was a true test of the best and most consistent player in the world. Now it's a measure of quantity over quality.

Keegan
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:40 AM
http://x.vukajlija.com/var/uploads/reactions/201205/5384/me+on+morbid.+lol+jk.+i+don+t+find+morbid+all+that _702b3b_3731147.gif?1338465513

Seriously dude, you compare it to what we've had the past couple of years and it is better. The top players are more consistent and the quality is improving. I didn't say this is the best tennis we've ever seen, it's not, but compared to what we've had post-Henin, it's tons better.

BH both wings
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:52 AM
I think it is funny how people actually believe that tennis is shit right now. If it was, it would be easy for a single decent player to just do the right thing and dominate all those suckers out there. Why doesn't that happen? There is so much more depth in women's tennis than ever before, the athleticism in the top 100 is by magnitudes better than 10 or even more 20 years ago. How does this conspiracy actually work where every single tennis coach teaches the wrong game so that their players can suck harder?

Of course not. Tennis is an evolutionary sport, it gets better and better and better. Not be the standards of stick-in-the-muds like me, but by the tennis standards itself: being successful. It turns out that player types like those 10 or 20 or 30 years ago are not successful anymore. Because tennis moved on.

I'm going to be bad-rep'd to death for what I'm writing here, I'm sure:
Most of the ecological niches that made players like Graf on the one hand or Davenport possible don't exist anymore. Players like that would be chanceless early in their careers and needed to adapt to their competition. And that happened to all the talents there are, they didn't vanish, they just need to do so much more now than they needed to do in the good old times. And that means they become workers much more than geniuses. It's a totally natural process.

Sam L
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:56 AM
The problem is that the sport is becoming like table tennis. All surfaces and styles neutralized. When I started watching tennis over 20 years ago, there was a lot of variety in surfaces and in playing styles. Both on the men's and women's side. Now all of that has pretty much disappeared.

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 10:59 AM
also the utter lack of athletic players that are coming through now is sad. forget the big 4 who were athletes out of this world, where are the dementievas and momos of the tennis world now who were 2nd tier top players but fantastic athletes?

Stop glorifying previous era that much. Dementieva's serve was considered a joke until 2008 or so, even then she was outplayed by emerging generation suck. Dementieva would get routined by Azarenka or Radwanska of 2012.

Coconut91
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:04 AM
The problem is that the sport is becoming like table tennis. All surfaces and styles neutralized. When I started watching tennis over 20 years ago, there was a lot of variety in surfaces and in playing styles. Both on the men's and women's side. Now all of that has pretty much disappeared.

Yes but that is not players' fault, like some people tend to suggest. They just addapt to changes in tennis because that's the way to be successful.

I agree with BH both wings.

BH both wings
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:04 AM
The problem is that the sport is becoming like table tennis. All surfaces and styles neutralized. When I started watching tennis over 20 years ago, there was a lot of variety in surfaces and in playing styles. Both on the men's and women's side. Now all of that has pretty much disappeared.

In my opinion that is not primarily a reaction on the surface changes, but more on the fact that there is so much more money on both tours. That means many more players train professionally and there are much less "host" type of players to be exploited by specialists.

Of course, that is heavily supported by the technical progression: Nowadays, the huge amount of training and the improvements in racket and string tech make ground-strokes so much more efficient that they kill everything else, especially on the women's side. For example, people complain about the "poor" volleying skills, but the fact is: volleying nowadays is much too risky against current skill and tech level strokes. And it is counterproductive to put too much effort into things that actually lose you points ...

Gilas.
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:07 AM
Here is a query: who were the competition of the post-Wingis era (2000-2008) and how does it differ from the competition from the beginning of the emergence of "Generation SUCK"? And I'm not just talking about the top players competing against themselves, but overall. What were the demographics in terms of playing style?

sammy01
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:08 AM
I think it is funny how people actually believe that tennis is shit right now. If it was, it would be easy for a single decent player to just do the right thing and dominate all those suckers out there. Why doesn't that happen? There is so much more depth in women's tennis than ever before, the athleticism in the top 100 is by magnitudes better than 10 or even more 20 years ago. How does this conspiracy actually work where every single tennis coach teaches the wrong game so that their players can suck harder?

Of course not. Tennis is an evolutionary sport, it gets better and better and better. Not be the standards of stick-in-the-muds like me, but by the tennis standards itself: being successful. It turns out that player types like those 10 or 20 or 30 years ago are not successful anymore. Because tennis moved on.

I'm going to be bad-rep'd to death for what I'm writing here, I'm sure:
Most of the ecological niches that made players like Graf on the one hand or Davenport possible don't exist anymore. Players like that would be chanceless early in their careers and needed to adapt to their competition. And that happened to all the talents there are, they didn't vanish, they just need to do so much more now than they needed to do in the good old times. And that means they become workers much more than geniuses. It's a totally natural process.

her name is vika and she has done exactly as you just said this year.

Stop glorifying previous era that much. Dementieva's serve was considered a joke until 2008 or so, even then she was outplayed by emerging generation suck. Dementieva would get routined by Azarenka or Radwanska of 2012.

yeah cus vika who is serving 10 df's a match a lot of the time right now and aga and her powder puff serve would obviously never get broken against a returner like dementieva.

i also didn't mention dementieva's game, just her athletic ability, something vika and aga cant touch no matter how hard they try.

stop glorifying the rubbish at the top of women's tennis right now :wavey:

Young 8
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:10 AM
People should really stop living in the past

Human beings are constantly evolving and today's Athletes would smash yesterday's

In any sports

madmax
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:11 AM
yeah cus vika who is serving 10 df's a match a lot of the time right now and aga and her powder puff serve would obviously never get broken against a returner like dementieva.

i also didn't mention dementieva's game, just her athletic ability, something vika and aga cant touch no matter how hard they try.

stop glorifying the rubbish at the top of women's tennis right now :wavey:

the problem is that Dementieva wouldn't hold ONCE against a returner like Vika:wavey: Her serve was even bigger joke even in her heyday. Current Vika and Radwanska would routine Dementieva left and right, just like any competent player did to russian in mid to late 00's

Young 8
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:12 AM
I think it is funny how people actually believe that tennis is shit right now. If it was, it would be easy for a single decent player to just do the right thing and dominate all those suckers out there. Why doesn't that happen? There is so much more depth in women's tennis than ever before, the athleticism in the top 100 is by magnitudes better than 10 or even more 20 years ago. How does this conspiracy actually work where every single tennis coach teaches the wrong game so that their players can suck harder?

Of course not. Tennis is an evolutionary sport, it gets better and better and better. Not be the standards of stick-in-the-muds like me, but by the tennis standards itself: being successful. It turns out that player types like those 10 or 20 or 30 years ago are not successful anymore. Because tennis moved on.

I'm going to be bad-rep'd to death for what I'm writing here, I'm sure:
Most of the ecological niches that made players like Graf on the one hand or Davenport possible don't exist anymore. Players like that would be chanceless early in their careers and needed to adapt to their competition. And that happened to all the talents there are, they didn't vanish, they just need to do so much more now than they needed to do in the good old times. And that means they become workers much more than geniuses. It's a totally natural process.

Perfecly said

Mistress of Evil
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:14 AM
It happened shortly after the void Henin left in 2008.

Gosh, that being just begs to be hated. Has she stuck around the likes of Ivanovic, Stosur, Li, Azarenka would not have even come close to hold a GS title nor the Sacred Slamless Trinity (Jankovic, Safina & Karolina) would have violated the Numero Uno throne. :crying2:

EDIT: Dear Lord, I forgot the worst one SCHIAVONE!

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:17 AM
yeah cus vika who is serving 10 df's a match a lot of the time right now and aga and her powder puff serve would obviously never get broken against a returner like dementieva.

i also didn't mention dementieva's game, just her athletic ability, something vika and aga cant touch no matter how hard they try.

stop glorifying the rubbish at the top of women's tennis right now :wavey:
So someone whose game was inferior to generation suck's and couldn't whack the ball to start the point properly was a very competitive player of the previous decade who managed to reach several slam finals and you think it means the previous decade was superior to the current moment. Please.

sammy01
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:17 AM
the problem is that Dementieva wouldn't hold ONCE against a returner like Vika:wavey: Her serve was even bigger joke even in her heyday. Current Vika and Radwanska would routine Dementieva left and right, just like any competent player did to russian in mid to late 00's

this is a joke right, even at her serving worst dementieva was still scoring wins over venus, henin, capriati, davenport, clijsters ect

but obviously vika >>>>>> venus, henin, capriati, davenport, clijsters :lol:

sammy01
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:20 AM
So someone whose game was inferior to generation suck's and couldn't whack the ball to start the point properly was a very competitive player of the previous decade who managed to reach several slam finals and you think it means the previous decade was superior to the current moment. Please.

inferior to generation suck's lol

6j7zQRA0KwI

Grigorpova
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:21 AM
I think we're expecting too much from this generation, power has become the main and variety is taking a back seat.

Viktymise
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:26 AM
It saddens me that stans of The Vulture Squad view Dementieva as a big joke considering some of her H2Hs against said players. But she's only got herself to blame for that.

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:26 AM
inferior to generation suck's lol

I had a direct comparison in Radwanska-Dementieva matches thank you :hatoff:

Viktymise
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:28 AM
I had a direct comparison in Radwanska-Dementieva matches thank you :hatoff:

That's like saying Pironkova is better than Venus because of a comparison you can make between all of their matches.

The Dawntreader
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:31 AM
It saddens me that stans of The Vulture Squad view Dementieva as a big joke considering some of her H2Hs against said players. But she's only got herself to blame for that.

They have short memories. If they saw some of the tennis she was playing in '04/05, they'd think different.

Juju Nostalgique
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:34 AM
IMO the problem is the brain. Lots of chokes, UE and so on. I think they don't care about psychology anymore, even if now they actually hire psychologists. :spit:

Champions like Seles, Graf, Navs were all about dominance, mental dominance. It was very rare to see them brainfart or throwing games with silly errors. Now you take a WS final and it's unwatchable, for example.

Not everything is BBB. UEs are ugly, very ugly, and many fans are just happy with "good" UE/winners ratios. That's stupid. Fans should be happy with watching good tennis and that's not always possible. :silly:

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:37 AM
That's like saying Pironkova is better than Venus because of a comparison you can make between all of their matches.

Fair enough. But I do believe current top players are better than the second tier of the previous decade. I'll leave it at that, there's no point discussing it further as we have no way to verify it.

jameshazza
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:40 AM
If some people read the first sentence, I said we're heading for an absolute shit era, not that we're currently in one.

sammy01
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:45 AM
Fair enough. But I do believe current top players are better than the second tier of the previous decade. I'll leave it at that, there's no point discussing it further as we have no way to verify it.

clijsters was considered a 2nd tier player by many in her 1st career, she has had no problems dipping in and out of the tour these days winning slams even getting to #1 for a week on the lightest of schedules.

Simugna Help
Jun 1st, 2012, 11:53 AM
There's no point in discussing it further as we're moving into wild speculations territory, but I find it amusing how you call Clijsters at first one of the Big 4 and one of the most athletic women in the history of the sport, then you're reducing her to the second rate player for the sake of your argument. Be consistent, please.

mac47
Jun 1st, 2012, 02:46 PM
We're not talkin about grunting. We're talking about game, and the serious lack there will be in a few years time, and why that is?

There will not be a "serious lack" because Kvitova has all the shots.

tennisvideos
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:02 PM
People should really stop living in the past

Human beings are constantly evolving and today's Athletes would smash yesterday's

In any sports

Yes humans and sporting stars and games evolve BUT the MAIN reason there is such a difference between the players of today and those of the past is the result of the dramatic improvements in TECHNOLOGY.

If today's players had to play predominantly on grass and clay with wooden rackets then there wouldn't be as much difference between the champions of today and those from decades past.

And most of us that appreciate tennis today and the history do live in the present. I play tournament tennis a few times a week and I watch and follow the tour today. So we aren't living in the past. I am happy to admit that I have 1000s of matches on DVD from the champions of the past that I watch on occasion and I can still remember what the game was like. So I only spend a small amount of time remembering the past, as I am sure so do others who have followed the sport for many years. Anyway, my point stands. There wouldn't be much difference between the champions of the past and those of today if conditions and technology were the same for both. A champion will rise to the top regardless - it's all about the mind set.

Nicolás89
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:38 PM
I think this a transitional era that started in 2008/2009 & it is finally coming to an end, look at the men from 1997-2003 it took them 6 years to get out of transition.

Charlatan
Jun 1st, 2012, 03:58 PM
This is how I see it too. I don't believe in a sudden lack of talent among juniors. I think the problem is caused by all those girls trying for the last several years to emulate 'bam-shriek-bam-shriek-bammers' instead of putting sustained effort into development of tennis skills that make one a complete tennis player. Tennis, after all, was not supposed to be about serve, athleticism, and hitting the ball with as much power as possible.

of course, u'd say this kind of post, seeing the pug in your avatar!

the bold part :haha: if tennis is not about athleticism, then :help:

starin
Jun 1st, 2012, 04:04 PM
The reason we're here is because from 2000 on (when the mini Hingis era was clearly over) tennis commentators, writers, coaches, etc. were all bitching and moaning about how the women's game is so one dimensional and all the players only hit hard and there are too many errors, etc. Tennis elitist would rather watch a 5 hour mugathon with 20+ rallies where no winners are hit than see a shotmaker spray a few errors here and there.

pancake
Jun 1st, 2012, 04:29 PM
That's like saying Pironkova is better than Venus because of a comparison you can make between all of their matches.

But being more athletic doesn't mean you have a better game either, it's like saying Dementieva's game is better than Hingis' because she's more athletic.
And Seles could hardly be considered 'athletic' by many but she has a great game too.

sammy01
Jun 1st, 2012, 05:53 PM
There's no point in discussing it further as we're moving into wild speculations territory, but I find it amusing how you call Clijsters at first one of the Big 4 and one of the most athletic women in the history of the sport, then you're reducing her to the second rate player for the sake of your argument. Be consistent, please.

that is my point, as a player and an athlete kim shits all over any of gen suck, yet she in her 1st career was even considered a 2nd tier player by some.