Tennis Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I finally had an opportunity to watch this match. Wow. I had forgotten how well Evonne moved and how she took it to Chrissie. Chrissie was making her run, run, run, and Evonne was getting some great "gets" and some amasing ralley's. I could see the exhaustion in both women at the end. Evonne really worked Chrissie with that backhand volley at net!

On Evert's part, I had forgotten that Chris actually wasn't a bad volleyer when she put her mind to it even back then. She was also more aggressive than I remembered with her baseline game.

In the recesses of my mind I "knew" this because I was there to see it, but I have probably let revisionist thinking on the game by people at present clutter what I used to know to be true. And Chris' overhead? Much better than I remembered. She actually hit some good overhead angled winners, and looked not so "deer in the headlights" while doing it.

I did not miss the power/pace that I've gotten used to in the new "ping pong on a tennis court" (as Illie Nastase called it) game of the modern era. In fact, at times, the pace was plenty nice between Evert and Evonne with those old wood racquets!

Today on this board and others, I read so many people denigrating the old classic game played with wood, that I think I've begun to convince myself that its not as fun to watch as I remembered. Which just isn't true. It was plenty good, with some great players, who played aggressively, hit hard (considering the equipment) at times, and took advantage of every angle on the tennis court!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,968 Posts
I think that many of those people that are denigrating the old game are teenagers that don't even know that they played with wood before the mid-80's. And if they do they think that it doesn't make that much of a difference. They think that it would take Serena, Sharapova and co only a few weeks "to get used to that old equipment" and they would be able to do the same things with wood and play with as much power as they do today. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
I think that many of those people that are denigrating the old game are teenagers that don't even know that they played with wood before the mid-80's. And if they do they think that it doesn't make that much of a difference. They think that it would take Serena, Sharapova and co only a few weeks "to get used to that old equipment" and they would be able to do the same things with wood and play with as much power as they do today. :rolleyes:
Truth is; there is no rule about what kind of equipment that you can bring to the court then and now. You can make your racket you want it to be. It really didn't make a difference till Graf came into the scene and Monica Seles with that Yonex and started to do different things with the ball. That could have been done then as well but that athletes just wasn't there then like it is now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,496 Posts
Yeah - forget that weird Federer vs Nadal grass/clay contest.

I'd rather see Venus v Serena (and the rest) on grass - playing mixed as well as doubles and singles - with little wooden rackets, no sit-downs on the changeovers, and no injury time-outs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Yeah - forget that weird Federer vs Nadal grass/clay contest.

I'd rather see Venus v Serena (and the rest) on grass - playing mixed as well as doubles and singles - with little wooden rackets, no sit-downs on the changeovers, and no injury time-outs.
I'd too like to see more of the top current players in more events like doubles and mixed. Except, they can't hardly stay healthy enough to play the singles events that they've committed too.

Also, they'd have to get used to wood racquets if they used them (very different from oversized graphite's used today). John McEnroe once said that he wished all players would learn on wood in order to perfect their strokes before moving on to graphite oversized.

I wonder what those Yonex racquets that Graf and Seles used had going for them? When they reaired the FO final between Graf and Navratilova recently on TTC, it was mentioned that Martina had changed to Graf's Yonex (although painted to hide the name) because she figured that that difference in equipment effected the amount of power that Graf had verses the amount that Martina could generate. Apparently, changing to that stick helped close the gap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
Yeah - forget that weird Federer vs Nadal grass/clay contest.

I'd rather see Venus v Serena (and the rest) on grass - playing mixed as well as doubles and singles - with little wooden rackets, no sit-downs on the changeovers, and no injury time-outs.
Serena and Venus did play mixed and regular doubles unlike others. Changeovers started with Chris because she was popular. So, TV and advertiser wanted time for commercials. Hence, changeovers. It started in small tournaments and when Chris grew, it grew. Blame it on her.

I really believe the Prince racket that Pam Shriver used to the U.S. Open finals in 1978 made that impact. Here was a big 16 year old teen getting to a final and she is a high-schooler. Everybody started to believe that they could get to a final if they have that racket. It wasn't true as we know. You need a certain athletic ability to play with a graphite and a oversized racket effectively.

Good speed and strength can take away that power look at Justine. That is why you are seeing, players using looser strings to create angles particularly in the men's game. However, there is not enough speed and stenght in the women's game like you see in the men's game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Serena and Venus did play mixed and regular doubles unlike others. Changeovers started with Chris because she was popular. So, TV and advertiser wanted time for commercials. Hence, changeovers. It started in small tournaments and when Chris grew, it grew. Blame it on her.
By changeovers, do you mean TV breaks? Most sports do that for American TV. I love that Chrissie is the one that brought it about in tennis! Cool. :worship:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
By changeovers, do you mean TV breaks? Most sports do that for American TV. I love that Chrissie is the one that brought it about in tennis! Cool. :worship:
Yes, I do! They couldn't get enough of Chrissie. She paid the tournaments and they knew it including Wimbledon. Australia was slow to learn and so were the French. Wimbledon and U.S. Open knew. Chrissie did increase TV revenue in the U.S. at any tournament. This is before cable.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top