CAMELOT FANTASIES

Quote from: thetruth on March 12, 2014, 08:43:27 pm

1. Very interesting insight, Emma. I never thought about it that way. I always looked at it as conserving energy for the later rounds.

2. Never thought about the crowd and how it might affect him, also interesting.

3. You were right. He seem as if he wasn't pumped up at all, or maybe he got tired. I had the sound off.

I am not sure if you noticed but Sampras too had the same problem, not the big crowd but the opponents. His responses were very lukewarm against lower ranked players but when it came to players who were more of his league, he'd thrive on those challenges. But the difference is, his serves (both) were the most reliable weapon in his arsenal, so he really didn't need to worry about losing to these lesser ranked players in his prime. Andy does not have that luxury - especially not against big servers like Raonic, Isner etc. and anyone who has more consistent serves than his. So Andy really needs to think about what he can truly afford. Deep down inside he knows that he is rich enough to live rest of his life comfortably so this is surely not a do or die situation for him. It's disappointing and that's all there is, for him anyway. I am sure he got over the loss already.

Nadal, Federer, Nole aren't that way. They take each of their opponent very seriously and like to show off a lot by beating them quite easily. They are always busy showing that they are the masters of the game to the lower ranked players. They are also very focused. Nole does have a slight tendency to get a bit unmindful during a match, but both Federer and Nadal are extremely focused. And if they still lose it, it would be because they are not feeling as confident as they typically do due to injuries or bad losses etc. but almost never because they didn't take their opponents seriously. Nole is very focuses most of the time. He has the tendency to get a bit nervous when he faces a worthy opponent but his lack of concentration is almost never the reason for losing. 

As to the crowd, Andy's slightly spoiled in this regard. A good or bad (who's cheering against him or cheering more for his opponent) crowd tend to bring out the best in him. I do think it has everything to do with him being British. Personally I think he'd have been far more successful if he had been an American. First of all, he would have gotten less attention from the media; 2nd, he would have been far more open and relaxed and would have had a much firmer goal as he wouldn't have then had the pressure of breaking the 77 year old drought. Also, had he been an American he would have been more encouraged by the likes of Sampras, Agassi, McEnroe, Courier, Connors etc. and would have had a different sets of goals. Plus, the Americans tend to support their players without any condition so that would have had a positive reflect on him.

Andy is a very talented and skillful player. He's also very athletic and gifted. It would be a crying shame if he didn't maximize all his potentiality to actuality.

Fabulous analysis, Emma, spot on in every regard.

1. Yes, I definitely noticed that with Sampras. Pete was very well aware of what situation he was facing, and he thrived on the big moment and didn't worry as much about lower opponents. I think a lot of that had to do with his mindset. Pete was very confident in his abilities and comfortable with himself. He pretty much did what he wanted to do and didn't care what others thought about it. That's why I liked that.

2. I agree with everything you said about Andy, too. The thing with Andy though, to me, is that he's a laid back character who happens to be supremely talented. and he's in an era with the three showoffs. Can he beat them? Yeah, does he care to? Sometimes, it depends on his motivation. I doubt he would've won Wimbledon if the press hadn't gotten on his nerves so bad. Andy just seems to want to enjoy life, not necessarily be the second coming. This puts him in a quandary. He knows he should be vying for all these titles like a dervish, but he also isn't sure he wants to.

To me, Federer and Nole play for glory. Rafa plays for passion, and Andy plays because he can, and he enjoys it. He's in the Big 4 because of his incredible skill set, but I'm not always sure he wants to be there.

What do you think?

Well, that's nice MC but I am sure there's still a lot left in Andy. He can reach to No. 1 - a feat yet to be achieved by him. Also, he can try and win as many Slams as possible. And one more Masters and he ties with Samrpas but he can definitely set a goal to win a few more and surpass a few there. Win a few small titles here and there. If anything he has nothing to lose and everything to gain. Let's see that God mode for a while, Andy 2.0 - a very consistent and determined Murray. No more roller coasters but just a pure joy ride for a while. It is left unknown and it can happen.

Sure, agreed, to a point.   I'm just saying he really doesn't have to do more.  His career is already a dream for about 99% of tennis players, and I suspect he has already fulfilled a large bulk of his dreams, with perhaps the exception of the #1 thing.  But one can't be sure that was a realistic goal in his mind considering the competition.  I would have to look around for his thoughts about that, which probably have changed over time.  Obviously if things worked out just right, he might get it. 

Respectfully,
masterclass

morning everybody.

great pics general masterclass. keep them coming.



 

Fabulous analysis, Emma, spot on in every regard.

1. Yes, I definitely noticed that with Sampras. Pete was very well aware of what situation he was facing, and he thrived on the big moment and didn't worry as much about lower opponents. I think a lot of that had to do with his mindset. Pete was very confident in his abilities and comfortable with himself. He pretty much did what he wanted to do and didn't care what others thought about it. That's why I liked that.

2. I agree with everything you said about Andy, too. The thing with Andy though, to me, is that he's a laid back character who happens to be supremely talented. and he's in an era with the three showoffs. Can he beat them? Yeah, does he care to? Sometimes, it depends on his motivation. I doubt he would've won Wimbledon if the press hadn't gotten on his nerves so bad. Andy just seems to want to enjoy life, not necessarily be the second coming. This puts him in a quandary. He knows he should be vying for all these titles like a dervish, but he also isn't sure he wants to.

To me, Federer and Nole play for glory. Rafa plays for passion, and Andy plays because he can, and he enjoys it. He's in the Big 4 because of his incredible skill set, but I'm not always sure he wants to be there.

What do you think?

I do think you are quite right in that regard (highlighted part). While I'd agree that both Federer and Nole mostly play for glory I do feel they also love the sport and are passionate about it. I'd probably distribute it 70% glory and 30% passion (lol). And while I do think Nadal is very passionate I do feel he enjoys the glory as well but quietly. Perhaps the percentage would be the opposite in this case mostly based on his on court persona where not only he shows passion but he also shows enjoying the glory a bit.

Andy has always been an enigma.  He seems to be rather laid back, yes and perhaps you are right about the media. He probably loves the criticism who knows and it probably ignites the fire in him, but I do know he absolutely loves playing for his country. I do take it as a hold back. Federer has yet to win the Olympics and given his long history in tennis, it makes no sense or rather shows a lack for his country maybe, but he has almost broken every record out there. And that's not a personal glory only as it's contributed to the country as well even indirectly so.

I'd say Andy mostly plays because he can and only sometimes he enjoys it. His on court attitude is very telling in this regard. You don't often see him enjoying playing tennis. He looks much happier off court in fact.

You may be writing theses, is that a word? Too lazy to look it up, but this girl is on fire with her analyses today.

Thoroughly enjoying them.

Agree with everything you've posted.

Thanks but I am just babbling really, as usual.

As to thesis or dissertation, here's a fine example I have and that's how I am implying it.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theses

In fact, if I were Andy's coach, I would never ever tell him that he has achieved most of his dreams or that he has a career dream for about 99% of tennis players out there. I'd rather encourage and motivate him for more. Look at Federer in this instance, now this guy has achieved most things in his career and yet age 32, he goes and gets a new coach. I don't see Federer fans opposing that; in fact, they are quite delighted about it. Some are even predicting 'he's back'. The thing is, Andy himself isn't saying. He isn't saying he lacks motivation or that he's not 100% yet. What he's saying is that he's playing back to his full fitness and level. What I am doing here is simply giving my opinion based on his recent performances and nothing more.

Of course Andy being all satisfied and giving up the racquet at this mid and prime stage of  his career will benefit certain players as they will end up winning more in absence of a full competition, but that's never a good for tennis. Because there's only so long you can put up with old faces and tell the younger ones that they have achieved their dreams when there's still so much more to go for.

And not only as a coach, as an Andy fan as well, I would never encourage Andy to think that way.

Now who likes some stats? I am in donation mood so here it goes.

There are about 60,000 thoughts go into our minds everyday. Most of it are garbage, negative and redundant but I've said that before already. 

Observe your own thoughts and see what they are all about. An average Federer fan probably thinks about Federer 58,000 times a day. I kid you not and I am being generous. lol

Handsome Andy?





Cute Andy?



Andy who believes in divine intelligence?