[binky-GOAT]

Originally Posted by chingching

Which players do you think are particularly unique and why do you like the Asadinator???

Obviously Ash reason why I joined this place. There is too much to like about her, so I won't waste everybody's time, unless you're interested In short words, she defies everything I hate about the WTA: technique wise (ugly, boring), mentally weak (crybabies) and the general bitchiness (as if you need a special bark or scream to make you play better) whereas Ash is calm, arrogant and beautiful to watch.

Another player which I think is very unique (and flying under the radar recently, CH ranking of 165) is Khromacheva. She plays like Kerber, but more aggressive mindset because she looks to attack. Both have heavy spinning forehands, but Irina is more flexible with it (love how she can dig out balls on the baseline but still produce an aggressive top-spin shot from it, like Nadal does). Obviously consistency and mindset wise they are worlds apart, but she can improve. Like Barty, I feel Khromacheva has a great game to watch.

Townsend another lefty, don't rate her as much as Khromacheva, she doesn't have the same flair. But her volleying skills are very good especially for a girl, which makes her unique. Just have to worry about her fitness though, because no point being a volleyer if you can't get to the net fast enough.

I loved the energy of Putintseva when I saw her against JJ. What impresses me about her is her movement, her feet move really fast, so she doesn't struggle when chasing balls like most girls do. Very good balance when she changes direction too, none of this silly WTA cow stance crap. She can turn out to be a fun counter-puncher to watch.

Haven't seen much of Vekic, Abanda and Bencic. Hopefully see Vekic tonight.

[chingching]

Originally Posted by Asadinator

Obviously Ash reason why I joined this place. There is too much to like about her, so I won't waste everybody's time, unless you're interested In short words, she defies everything I hate about the WTA: technique wise (ugly, boring), mentally weak (crybabies) and the general bitchiness (as if you need a special bark or scream to make you play better) whereas Ash is calm, arrogant and beautiful to watch.

Another player which I think is very unique (and flying under the radar recently, CH ranking of 165) is Khromacheva. She plays like Kerber, but more aggressive mindset because she looks to attack. Both have heavy spinning forehands, but Irina is more flexible with it (love how she can dig out balls on the baseline but still produce an aggressive top-spin shot from it, like Nadal does). Obviously consistency and mindset wise they are worlds apart, but she can improve. Like Barty, I feel Khromacheva has a great game to watch.

Townsend another lefty, don't rate her as much as Khromacheva, she doesn't have the same flair. But her volleying skills are very good especially for a girl, which makes her unique. Just have to worry about her fitness though, because no point being a volleyer if you can't get to the net fast enough.

I loved the energy of Putintseva when I saw her against JJ. What impresses me about her is her movement, her feet move really fast, so she doesn't struggle when chasing balls like most girls do. Very good balance when she changes direction too, none of this silly WTA cow stance crap. She can turn out to be a fun counter-puncher to watch.

Haven't seen much of Vekic, Abanda and Bencic. Hopefully see Vekic tonight.

Interesting
The thing I find funny is that IMO Khromacheva and Barty are Polar Opposites, yet you like them both
I like the players you like I only recently liked Putintseva as one of my friends has met her and said she was very nice I love Townsend's personality She's so sweet I also like Bouchard, Svitolina and Abanda but don't really like Bencic. IDK why, but she just seems to be overranked And I hate all whorers. But I like Siniakova and Lottner Lottner and Anett I draw many similarities between. I like Ash but I am not sure whether she will transition well as right now she doesn't hit the ball hard enough to be an agressor but she isn't fast enough to be a counter-puncher. Her variety will surely come in handy during the grass season though It will be interesting to see who do well in seniors. BTW, if you want to see Khromacheva and Putintseva as a child, go to Irina Khromacheva's Facebook profile (not page, but actual account) and look though her photos (they are all public) and you will see a Eurosport Video of the Les Petits As Final vs Putintseva MP and Ceremony and a video of her as a 12 year old which is genuinely HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by BlueTrees

No offence but you really need to stop overhyping her. Really, really bad scoreline today.

Well if Anett had not been in her bad form and she had drawn Lina Stanciute or Marta Sirotkina in MD, she could have made the QFs as if she beat one, then she would play the other. So I am obviously not verhyping" her

[binky-GOAT]

Originally Posted by chingching

Interesting
The thing I find funny is that IMO Khromacheva and Barty are Polar Opposites, yet you like them both
I like the players you like I only recently liked Putintseva as one of my friends has met her and said she was very nice I love Townsend's personality She's so sweet I also like Bouchard, Svitolina and Abanda but don't really like Bencic. IDK why, but she just seems to be overranked And I hate all whorers. But I like Siniakova and Lottner Lottner and Anett I draw many similarities between. I like Ash but I am not sure whether she will transition well as right now she doesn't hit the ball hard enough to be an agressor but she isn't fast enough to be a counter-puncher. Her variety will surely come in handy during the grass season though It will be interesting to see who do well in seniors. BTW, if you want to see Khromacheva and Putintseva as a child, go to Irina Khromacheva's Facebook profile (not page, but actual account) and look though her photos (they are all public) and you will see a Eurosport Video of the Les Petits As Final vs Putintseva MP and Ceremony and a video of her as a 12 year old which is genuinely HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!

It depends the way you look at it when comparing Barty and Khromacheva. Obviously they have opposite styles, but overall they are quite similar.

Just think about Federer and Nadal. Completely different games yes. But they both have many similarities, like they hit with lots of spin. Their matches are always about angles they can generate, movement and their skill.

I don't know those other players you mentioned.

About Ash not having enough power, yes she doesn't hit hard. But her technique is perfect and she generates lots of topspin on her shots, so when the ball bounces it gains pace, so her angles can be devastating. Also if she lands the ball deep on the baseline, the awkward bounce she is able to get prevents her opponents from attacking her. Ash is not a counter-puncher, she doesn't like endless rallies or running around, like you said her movement is not good enough for that game-style. If a rally is going too long, she tries to finish off the point.

Also you just leading me on to what I hate about WTA, by aggressor I guess you mean ball-bashing. You don't need to hit hard every shot to be aggressive. Something as simple as creating angles and moving up to the net is also aggressive play. In the WTA players don't have a happy medium, you are either a ballbasher or a pusher. Barty has this style which allows her to get safe margins over the net and use little energy, while also being aggressive.

Thanks, can you provide a direct link to the video?


Edit: I like Bouchard too, like Anett they both seem really friendly.

[Tennisfan06]

Disgusting loss , I expected her to win TBH, as Sun's results in past weeks weren't good. But again Anett got an opponent who decided to start playing good again, Sun beat Yashina 0 and 2 in R2

Too bad, I waited this tournament since I read she plays here and now such a fail result.

[muusa]

Originally Posted by BlueTrees

Last time I checked beating nobodies is better than losing to nobodies

That is true

But even Vekic got bagelled today, so everybody has bad days once in a while. Only.. Anett seems to have them too often. Anyway, if she continues the recent pattern, the next tournament should be better for her.

Also, interesting to read these longer discussions about junior players here.

[chingching]

Originally Posted by Asadinator

It depends the way you look at it when comparing Barty and Khromacheva. Obviously they have opposite styles, but overall they are quite similar.

Just think about Federer and Nadal. Completely different games yes. But they both have many similarities, like they hit with lots of spin. Their matches are always about angles they can generate, movement and their skill.

I don't know those other players you mentioned.

About Ash not having enough power, yes she doesn't hit hard. But her technique is perfect and she generates lots of topspin on her shots, so when the ball bounces it gains pace, so her angles can be devastating. Also if she lands the ball deep on the baseline, the awkward bounce she is able to get prevents her opponents from attacking her. Ash is not a counter-puncher, she doesn't like endless rallies or running around, like you said her movement is not good enough for that game-style. If a rally is going too long, she tries to finish off the point.

Also you just leading me on to what I hate about WTA, by aggressor I guess you mean ball-bashing. You don't need to hit hard every shot to be aggressive. Something as simple as creating angles and moving up to the net is also aggressive play. In the WTA players don't have a happy medium, you are either a ballbasher or a pusher. Barty has this style which allows her to get safe margins over the net and use little energy, while also being aggressive.

Thanks, can you provide a direct link to the video?


Edit: I like Bouchard too, like Anett they both seem really friendly.

Sure
I get your point on Ash I hope she becomes a professional because she is extremely different and I just adore the fact that when she won Wimbledon she barely fist pumped Of course she will make Top 50 and probably Top 20 but I fear that even though it is sad, that sometime she will get out hit. I don't like ballbashers, but I do like players like Anett and Irina who hit the ball hard and move their opponents around (I love how early Anett hits the ball, even if it's a moonball ). I don't know, but that is my fear I was going to say about Vekic I think BlueTrees. may have jinxed himself But as you said, everyone has bad days It's part of being a teenage tennis player

Here is the link
Tarbes: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=...type=3&theater
Irina + Daria: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=...type=3&theater

The second one is so funny. She is so annoying

Originally Posted by muusa

Also, interesting to read these longer discussions about junior players here.

IKR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[binky-GOAT]

Originally Posted by chingching

Sure
I get your point on Ash I hope she becomes a professional because she is extremely different and I just adore the fact that when she won Wimbledon she barely fist pumped Of course she will make Top 50 and probably Top 20 but I fear that even though it is sad, that sometime she will get out hit. I don't like ballbashers, but I do like players like Anett and Irina who hit the ball hard and move their opponents around (I love how early Anett hits the ball, even if it's a moonball ). I don't know, but that is my fear I was going to say about Vekic I think BlueTrees. may have jinxed himself But as you said, everyone has bad days It's part of being a teenage tennis player

Here is the link
Tarbes: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=...type=3&theater
Irina + Daria: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=...type=3&theater

The second one is so funny. She is so annoying



IKR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is inevitable that she will get out hit on occasions, but it's quite common in WTA even the best get outhit, unless you are Williams or Sharapova who attack from the first ball and don't give their opponents a chance. But Ash can minimize damage if she improves her defensive skills and consistency.

Yes Anett is always on the baseline, which is quite a common and successful tactic on the WTA these days, if you want to rebound the ball quickly giving your opponent little time. But it has 2 negatives: Shot selection becomes limited and if your opponent changes the pace you can make errors because you have less time to adjust. It suits her game though, because it revolves more around power than technical.

That video is great. Even at a young age you can see Khromacheva is quite talented, also vocal

After watching Vekic, It is difficult to say who has more potential. But I think Vekic is just a bit stronger than Anett, physically.

[Ksenia.]

Originally Posted by BlueTrees

Last time I checked beating nobodies is better than losing to nobodies

Amen to that

[binky-GOAT]

All these junior girls (Anett, Donna, Bencic, Abanda, Barty, Townsend, Khromacheva, etc) are far better than the boys. In fact the best boys are Liam Broady and Luke Saville, who are both 18 and have not made any impression in seniors (not even futures level). While all the girls have started winning senior matches (at challengers) at 14/15.

There might not be any teenage prodigies, but all these girls are making steady progress towards the WTA tour. While on the ATP, Tomic will be the youngest in the Top 100 for a few more years

[Dan_Doe]

Originally Posted by Asadinator

All these junior girls (Anett, Donna, Bencic, Abanda, Barty, Townsend, Khromacheva, etc) are far better than the boys. In fact the best boys are Liam Broady and Luke Saville, who are both 18 and have not made any impression in seniors (not even futures level). While all the girls have started winning senior matches (at challengers) at 14/15.

There might not be any teenage prodigies, but all these girls are making steady progress towards the WTA tour. While on the ATP, Tomic will be the youngest in the Top 100 for a few more years

Yeah, men's tennis' future doesn't look very bright with these juniors. The Dimitrov, Raonic, Goffin, Janowicz & then Tomic, Harrison generations are looking good, but if you take the last 4 years GS winners, such as Bhambri, Berta, Fernandes or Fucsovics.. I hope for late bloomers or guys who didn't play juniors to take over, otherwise the future doesn't look great.
Saville and Peliwo are rolling in juniors, but they barely hit the top 600 ATP as 18 yo. Tomic and Harrison were close to top 100 at their age.

Girls are developing much earlier, physically speaking, and it's a pretty normal thing for them to make an impact in pros at 16/17, but still women tennis seems to have a much brighter future.

[Chris 84]

Originally Posted by Dan_Doe

The Dimitrov, Raonic, Goffin, Janowicz & then Tomic, Harrison generations are looking good

not if you compare it to any other generation....like ever. not saying those guys aren't talented, they are, and i particularly like what i've seen from goffin, even if he is a bit lightweight. however, these guys are pretty much in the 20, 21 age range and have barely had a sniff of a chance of winning a slam, reaching the top-ranked places in the game, etc. they are already waaay behind most of the top players throughout history in the open era, and certainly by 23, the vast majority of first time slam winners are one (or two) hit wonders, with the exception being lendl. but like murray if he were to win a slam soon, lendl had proved that he belonged in the upper echelons of the game already.

what i mean is that in any other generation within the open era, the players who go on to have very good slam-winning careers have been at the very top in general between 17-21. there is no indication that the generation to which you refer will be in that bracket. they may surprise me, but i can't really see any of the players that you mentioned (or the likes of berankis, etc) becoming multi-time slam champions unless the generations that follow them are even worse. tomic perhaps has shown the most to me, and is still only 19, so i guess i'd go with him if i had to guess at one of these guys to become a huge success. but i can't really see it atm. by the time fed, djoke, rafa and murray are away, these guys will be in their mid-late 20s and it might be too late by then.

[chingching]

Originally Posted by Asadinator

It is inevitable that she will get out hit on occasions, but it's quite common in WTA even the best get outhit, unless you are Williams or Sharapova who attack from the first ball and don't give their opponents a chance. But Ash can minimize damage if she improves her defensive skills and consistency.

Yes Anett is always on the baseline, which is quite a common and successful tactic on the WTA these days, if you want to rebound the ball quickly giving your opponent little time. But it has 2 negatives: Shot selection becomes limited and if your opponent changes the pace you can make errors because you have less time to adjust. It suits her game though, because it revolves more around power than technical.

That video is great. Even at a young age you can see Khromacheva is quite talented, also vocal

After watching Vekic, It is difficult to say who has more potential. But I think Vekic is just a bit stronger than Anett, physically.

Well DOnna is about 5 CM taller (I think )
Anett does come to net more than most Juniors (there are videos of her on sport.err.ee in Tallinn 10K where she comes to net often ) but from what I've seen her volleys must be improved, except for her beautiful Drive Volley and Smash

On the topic of Girls developing faster, it is just as it has always been. Girls enter puberty younger then boys and coupled with their ability to keep up from a young age (and the fact that by the time Girls are 16 they are unlucky to grow much more, especially Anett and Donna who were both tall very young), it makes sense that they do better Also the womens relies more on timing and flexibility, rather than strength and stamina meaning it is easier for them to keep up. The good young mens player have often before come out of nowhere, and I expect that to happen in the 1993/92 Generation

[binky-GOAT]

@Chris, I totally agree with you. But 19-21yo generation will have plenty of chances for many years to come, because there are literally no promising young players. It is all getting worse and worse for ATP.

@chingching, good points. However I must remind you Tomic/Harrison/Raonic did not rise suddenly, they had a few years of good senior performances. Tomic won 1st round of AO at 16, Harrison played well at an ATP, etc. They were all ranked in the 200s at 16/17 years of age.

[chingching]

Originally Posted by Asadinator

@Chris, I totally agree with you. But 19-21yo generation will have plenty of chances for many years to come, because there are literally no promising young players. It is all getting worse and worse for ATP.

@chingching, good points. However I must remind you Tomic/Harrison/Raonic did not rise suddenly, they had a few years of good senior performances. Tomic won 1st round of AO at 16, Harrison played well at an ATP, etc. They were all ranked in the 200s at 16/17 years of age.

That is true but they all had advantages. Tomic had a really weird game and is a 1 in 10,000 player, while Raonic/Harrison had the weaponry. I just think they were extraordinarily good at their age I think that there will be some again, but as technology advances and it becomes harder and harder to have tennis as a part time career if you know what I mean, the Boys rankings will soon have so little effect on who breaks through and you won't really get any young guns any more That's one thing I like about the womens

[Dan_Doe]

Originally Posted by Chris 84

not if you compare it to any other generation....like ever. not saying those guys aren't talented, they are, and i particularly like what i've seen from goffin, even if he is a bit lightweight. however, these guys are pretty much in the 20, 21 age range and have barely had a sniff of a chance of winning a slam, reaching the top-ranked places in the game, etc. they are already waaay behind most of the top players throughout history in the open era, and certainly by 23, the vast majority of first time slam winners are one (or two) hit wonders, with the exception being lendl. but like murray if he were to win a slam soon, lendl had proved that he belonged in the upper echelons of the game already.

what i mean is that in any other generation within the open era, the players who go on to have very good slam-winning careers have been at the very top in general between 17-21. there is no indication that the generation to which you refer will be in that bracket. they may surprise me, but i can't really see any of the players that you mentioned (or the likes of berankis, etc) becoming multi-time slam champions unless the generations that follow them are even worse. tomic perhaps has shown the most to me, and is still only 19, so i guess i'd go with him if i had to guess at one of these guys to become a huge success. but i can't really see it atm. by the time fed, djoke, rafa and murray are away, these guys will be in their mid-late 20s and it might be too late by then.

That 'good' was supposed to mean 'decent'
If we stopped seeing teenage girl sensations anymore, since 2007 (Nicole ), I guess we won't see boys cracking the top at young ages either, so I think Dimitrov, Tomic, Harrison & co are doing just fine.
Considering Roger, Rafa, Nole and Andy won't be there forever, I expect these guys to dominate grand slams for a few years, especially given' the quality of younger up and comers.