Tennis Forum banner
41 - 60 of 64 Posts

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
Notes

:) Sharapova's charisma only worked in the 1st set but that didn't stop her from dominating the final set.

:) Davenport's new found creativity allowed her to win a few crucial games but obviously going down 0-5 in each of the first and last sets severely hurt her chances.

:) Maria's game may seem unbeatable right now but it's a matter of not matching up well to another player's game.
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
This is creative Davenport vs. the same aggressive Serena from before. Remember Serena won that match 7-5 4-6 6-2. This is a new day.

Serena Williams won the toss and elected to receive...

1st set, Davenport serves...

Williams 1-0
1-1
Davenport 2-1
Davenport 3-1
Davenport 4-1
Davenport 5-1
Davenport 6-1

Game and 1st set Davenport 6-1

---

2nd set, Williams serves...

Davenport 1-0
Davenport 2-0
Davenport 2-1
Davenport 3-1
Davenport 3-2
Davenport 4-2
Davenport 5-2
Davenport 6-2

Game, set and match Davenport 6-1 6-2!!!
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·
Notes

:) Sure, Lindsay was creative and like in the Sharapova match she used her creativity to win a few games. I'm beginning to think this is a good balanced trait that pays off. But Maria was able to beat this same Lindsay in three sets. Lindsay in this match, COMPLETELY shut down Serena's game. Serena needs to think about her game and how Lindsay shut her down, with or without her creativity because this is the most lop-sided match so far.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,685 Posts
I know we are in play-testing mode right now and nothing is totally cast in stone, but these are my thoughts. Strategy will be tough to implement in the game, because no matter what shot you use your chances of winning the game are 50/50, you'll either beat two shots or lose to two other shots.

The most powerful force in the game can only be used once per set (tactics). I know this will change when we can afford wonder shots, but how much it costs will play a big part in the game because if you lose all the time you won't be able to afford them.

Also, the creative thing kind of sucks. Now I'm not saying this because I lost, I did win a match too. I just don't think it is a good idea that someone can win a game with "zero" or "one for a shot, and beat someone else who has 10 for that same shot just because they are quote/unquote... creative.

I don't know, it just bugs me. :angel:
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 ·
Ms Tracy Austin said:
I know we are in play-testing mode right now and nothing is totally cast in stone, but these are my thoughts. Strategy will be tough to implement in the game, because no matter what shot you use your chances of winning the game are 50/50, you'll either beat two shots or lose to two other shots.

The most powerful force in the game can only be used once per set (tactics). I know this will change when we can afford wonder shots, but how much it costs will play a big part in the game because if you lose all the time you won't be able to afford them.

Also, the creative thing kind of sucks. Now I'm not saying this because I lost, I did win a match too. I just don't think it is a good idea that someone can win a game with "zero" or "one for a shot, and beat someone else who has 10 for that same shot just because they are quote/unquote... creative.

I don't know, it just bugs me. :angel:
Are you saying creative is overpowered or underpowered? :)
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #51 ·
This is creative Davenport vs. creative Schnyder playing for the first time. :)

Davenport won the toss and elected to serve...

1st set, Davenport serving...

Schnyder 1-0
1-1
Davenport 2-1
Davenport 3-1
Davenport 4-1
Davenport 5-1
Davenport 6-1

Game and 1st set Davenport 6-1

---

Davenport 1-0
Davenport 2-0
Davenport 2-1
Davenport 3-1
Davenport 4-1
Davenport 5-1
Davenport 5-2
Davenport 6-2

Game, set and match Davenport 6-1 6-2!!

Both were creative so the trait was rendered useless against each other which means it came down to strengths and weaknesses. Davenport played her strengths better. As simple as that.
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
This is aggressive Serena vs. creative Patty.

Williams won the toss and elected to serve...


1st set, Williams to serve...

Williams 1-0
Williams 2-0
Williams 2-1
2-2
Schnyder 3-2
3-3
Schnyder 4-3
Schnyder 5-3
Schnyder 6-3

Game and set Schnyder 6-3

---

2nd set, Schnyder to serve...

Schnyder 1-0
Schnyder 2-0
Schnyder 3-0
Schnyder 4-0
Schnyder 5-0
Schnyder 5-1
Schnyder 5-2
Schnyder 5-3
Schnyder 6-3

Game, set and match Schnyder 6-3 6-3!!!

I'm beginning to think that Serena's original gameplan is not very good because it worked in a close match against Davenport but since then she's been outclassed by almost everyone. If I were Serena I'd rethink the gameplan.
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #53 ·
This is still charismatic Sharapova but with a new gameplan and playing against creative Davenport who has been dominating...

Davenport won the toss, and elected to receive...

Sharapova serves, 1st set...

Sharapova 1-0
Sharapova 2-0
Sharapova 3-0
Sharapova 4-0
Sharapova 5-0
Sharapova 6-0

Game and 1st set Sharapova 6-0

---

Davenport serves, 2nd set...

Davenport 1-0
1-1
Davenport 2-1
Davenport 3-1
Davenport 4-1
Davenport 5-1
Davenport 6-1

Game and 2nd set Davenport 6-1

---

Sharapova serves, final set...

Davenport 1-0
1-1
Sharapova 2-1
Sharapova 3-1
Sharapova 4-1
Sharapova 4-2
Sharapova 5-2
Sharapova 6-2

Game, set and match Sharapova 6-0 1-6 6-2!!!

Well Davenport's creative game seemed invincible but it's not. At least not against Sharapova. This is why I think creative is not overpowered and definitely can be beaten. And Sharapova did NOT have charisma working in any of the sets which pretty much proves also that industrious players - which hasn't been experimented by anyone - also has a chance to beat anything creative or aggressive players through at them.
 

· Chionophile
Joined
·
40,406 Posts
Discussion Starter · #55 ·
Ms Tracy Austin said:
I know we are in play-testing mode right now and nothing is totally cast in stone, but these are my thoughts. Strategy will be tough to implement in the game, because no matter what shot you use your chances of winning the game are 50/50, you'll either beat two shots or lose to two other shots.
I think strategy is hard to implement in any game. And yes it is 50/50 at first. BUT remember the point of this game is, imo, to figure out your opponent's strengths and weaknesses. If you eventually find out that your opponent's strength is serve and she's using SERVE six times in a set, what are you going to do? Use mainly lobs and returns? As a creative player, if that player is non-creative, use serves? These are things the player needs to think about. At first everything is 50/50.

Ms Tracy Austin said:
The most powerful force in the game can only be used once per set (tactics). I know this will change when we can afford wonder shots, but how much it costs will play a big part in the game because if you lose all the time you won't be able to afford them.
Which is where ORGANIZED comes in. ;) Also remember the impact that forces like "loss of confidence" and "injury" will play.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
I think I get it, I'd like to join as Anna Kournikova
 
41 - 60 of 64 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top