-
Very nice place, General masterclass
I have a question for you:
Do you think Rafa would have been more successful on hardcourts and grass in the period 2005 - 2008 if instead of spinning his first serves in to start the points (and thus having incredibly high percentage first serves) he had gone for faster serves with worse placement and low percentage of first serves? -
-
Thank you Mr. Tee, or thank General Hercules as he suggested it.
The quick answer to your question is no, not in my opinion, primarily due to his stroke technique, and to confidence.
Now for the long answer...get a cup of your favorite beverage.
I think for the most part that Mr. Nadal simply had to get used to playing on these surfaces at a higher level and gain confidence on the surfaces against the better players. His advantage was that he was already at the highest level on clay against the best players by 2005, or even a bit earlier. So he already had confidence against those players. I would say he was very proficient on Wimbledon's grass between 2006-2008 as he made it to 3 finals against Roger Federer winning in 2008. He made the QF of the US Open in 2006 and the semis in 2008, so he was no slouch on hard either.
He grew up on clay. His Futures play consisted of 35 matches on clay (32-3), 0 on grass, 1 on hard (a loss), and 5 on carpet (undefeated by the way).
His Challenger surface play was more varied, but still predominately clay with 23 matches (18-5), 13 on hard (10-3), 0 on grass, 8 on carpet (6-2).
In my opinion, Nadal likes to have more time to prepare for his shots, especially as his big topspin requires a big swing. He is not as comfortable taking the ball on the rise. A fast serve by him only gets the ball back to him quicker. A slower more accurate serve gives him time to get ready. He seems to be more comfortable standing 2 or more meters behind the baseline. On higher bouncing courts like clay and many of the other hard courts like Indian Wells and Miami, standing further back gives him more time to prepare and he has more confidence hitting his topspin. The less confident he feels in his swing, the further back he stands, as close to the fence as he can get on some days.
Grass, by it's usual nature, is generally problematic for him, especially when it is fresh or soft from rain. The ball bounces too low to allow him to play as he usually does. It forces him to change his swing. Also sliced balls on grass bounce even lower and if it with sharper angle become impossible to play if he stands as far back as he would like. So he is forced to move in. Now at Wimbledon since 2001 when they changed the grass and soil composition, balls have been gradually bouncing higher than they ever used to, especially if London sees a dry spell. This has the effect of slowing play down, giving players additional time to react and allowing them to hit the ball higher in the strike zone instead of off their feet. It's the soil that gives this affect, as with the change of grass, it has become more dense (less air), more packed if you will, and less like loam.
Also, the affect of drier weather versus wet makes it's affect on the grass behind the baseline where a majority of players make their home these days. As the tournament progresses, the grass is worn out from use, and in drier weather is worn out even faster. By the second week, especially by the semis, it is literally dirt. This makes it much easier for players that use great side-to-side movement to defend. On fresh, more slippery grass, they simply can't do what they do on hard court or even clay. They can't take big long strides and plant their feet hard or slide with precision and change direction. If they try, they slip and fall down. Fresh grass requires and rewards great footwork, not great movement. Footwork are the little steps, the little adjustments you make as you move about. Shorter, quicker steps are rewarded. Many of the top defensive players of today don't have great footwork, namely Djokovic, Nadal, Murray. They have great movement for sure. Other players, such as Federer, have generally great footwork, can make small adjustments, with quick shorter steps and rarely do you seem them slip and fall, even on the freshest, more slippery grass.
So for Rafa, the challenge on grass is for him to survive the first week. He can do that against a majority of the lesser players that he plays against in the first week, but not all. Some players who use good tactics can make him very uncomfortable. In the second week it is generally more difficult to unbalance him. By then, it's predominantly dirt behind the baseline. The correct tactics to use in the second week against Nadal or other defenders with great movement, would be to play with more angles so that a Nadal or a Djokovic or a Murray is forced to run on the grass and not the dirt, or to play shorter slice shots and again force them to run and stop and turn on fresher grass and hit lower shots. Since not many serve and volley these days, the grass is generally still quite fresh from a meter or two beyond the service line to the net. Look at the Federer - Murray 2012 final during the 3rd set in the critical 18 deuce 5th game. Murray falls down 3 times in the one game, a technical knockout in boxing, but look where he falls. In the service box, and wide of the tramlines. The grass is still fresh in those places.
In 2013, I saw a different Rafa on hard courts than I had seen in a while, especially on the Cincinnati and US Open hard courts in the summer. His confidence was very high, and he played closer in than I've seen him, and was much more aggressive. This comes from confidence in his play. His timing was superb and he felt confident that he could make quicker adjustments and a quicker stroke.
I've probably gone on too long, Mr. Tee, I'll stop now.
Respectfully,
masterclass -
-
Thank you Mr. Tee, or thank General Hercules as he suggested it.
The quick answer to your question is no, not in my opinion, primarily due to his stroke technique, and to confidence.
Now for the long answer...get a cup of your favorite beverage.
I think for the most part that Mr. Nadal simply had to get used to playing on these surfaces at a higher level and gain confidence on the surfaces against the better players. His advantage was that he was already at the highest level on clay against the best players by 2005, or even a bit earlier. So he already had confidence against those players. I would say he was very proficient on Wimbledon's grass between 2006-2008 as he made it to 3 finals against Roger Federer winning in 2008. He made the QF of the US Open in 2006 and the semis in 2008, so he was no slouch on hard either.
He grew up on clay. His Futures play consisted of 35 matches on clay (32-3), 0 on grass, 1 on hard (a loss), and 5 on carpet (undefeated by the way).
His Challenger surface play was more varied, but still predominately clay with 23 matches (18-5), 13 on hard (10-3), 0 on grass, 8 on carpet (6-2).
In my opinion, Nadal likes to have more time to prepare for his shots, especially as his big topspin requires a big swing. He is not as comfortable taking the ball on the rise. A fast serve by him only gets the ball back to him quicker. A slower more accurate serve gives him time to get ready. He seems to be more comfortable standing 2 or more meters behind the baseline. On higher bouncing courts like clay and many of the other hard courts like Indian Wells and Miami, standing further back gives him more time to prepare and he has more confidence hitting his topspin. The less confident he feels in his swing, the further back he stands, as close to the fence as he can get on some days.
Grass, by it's usual nature, is generally problematic for him, especially when it is fresh or soft from rain. The ball bounces too low to allow him to play as he usually does. It forces him to change his swing. Also sliced balls on grass bounce even lower and if it with sharper angle become impossible to play if he stands as far back as he would like. So he is forced to move in. Now at Wimbledon since 2001 when they changed the grass and soil composition, balls have been gradually bouncing higher than they ever used to, especially if London sees a dry spell. This has the effect of slowing play down, giving players additional time to react and allowing them to hit the ball higher in the strike zone instead of off their feet. It's the soil that gives this affect, as with the change of grass, it has become more dense (less air), more packed if you will, and less like loam.
Also, the affect of drier weather versus wet makes it's affect on the grass behind the baseline where a majority of players make their home these days. As the tournament progresses, the grass is worn out from use, and in drier weather is worn out even faster. By the second week, especially by the semis, it is literally dirt. This makes it much easier for players that use great side-to-side movement to defend. On fresh, more slippery grass, they simply can't do what they do on hard court or even clay. They can't take big long strides and plant their feet hard or slide with precision and change direction. If they try, they slip and fall down. Fresh grass requires and rewards great footwork, not great movement. Footwork are the little steps, the little adjustments you make as you move about. Shorter, quicker steps are rewarded. Many of the top defensive players of today don't have great footwork, namely Djokovic, Nadal, Murray. They have great movement for sure. Other players, such as Federer, have generally great footwork, can make small adjustments, with quick shorter steps and rarely do you seem them slip and fall, even on the freshest, more slippery grass.
So for Rafa, the challenge on grass is for him to survive the first week. He can do that against a majority of the lesser players that he plays against in the first week, but not all. Some players who use good tactics can make him very uncomfortable. In the second week it is generally more difficult to unbalance him. By then, it's predominantly dirt behind the baseline. The correct tactics to use in the second week against Nadal or other defenders with great movement, would be to play with more angles so that a Nadal or a Djokovic or a Murray is forced to run on the grass and not the dirt, or to play shorter slice shots and again force them to run and stop and turn on fresher grass and hit lower shots. Since not many serve and volley these days, the grass is generally still quite fresh from a meter or two beyond the service line to the net. Look at the Federer - Murray 2012 final during the 3rd set in the critical 18 deuce 5th game. Murray falls down 3 times in the one game, a technical knockout in boxing, but look where he falls. In the service box, and wide of the tramlines. The grass is still fresh in those places.
In 2013, I saw a different Rafa on hard courts than I had seen in a while, especially on the Cincinnati and US Open hard courts in the summer. His confidence was very high, and he played closer in than I've seen him, and was much more aggressive. This comes from confidence in his play. His timing was superb and he felt confident that he could make quicker adjustments and a quicker stroke.
I've probably gone on too long, Mr. Tee, I'll stop now.
Respectfully,
masterclass
It was fascinating. You shouldn't have stopped.
As CD would say, "This is your place. You make the rules.
" -
-
I think the name of this thread should be, From the Desk of Masterclass. Just a suggestion.
-
-
Thank you for your great response, General masterclass!
-
-
I think the name of this thread should be, From the Desk of Masterclass. Just a suggestion.
that sounds like a cool suggestion.
I thought previously that the desk idea sounded too formal.
so we came up with a more relaxing and easy going theme.
at any rate whatever you folks decide works for me. -
-
what is wrong with American tennis?
it looks like it is in shambles. Americans are doing a poor job of developing tomorrow's champions.
whatever happened to the Harrison brothers?
and what about kudla and sock? -
-
what is wrong with American tennis?
it looks like it is in shambles. Americans are doing a poor job of developing tomorrow's champions.
whatever happened to the Harrison brothers?
and what about kudla and sock?
I really feel America will give birth to a great player in the future. That's my gut feeling. -
-
what is wrong with American tennis?
it looks like it is in shambles. Americans are doing a poor job of developing tomorrow's champions.
whatever happened to the Harrison brothers?
and what about kudla and sock?
I don't know. I think the present players lack charisma. It's hard to build a storyline around them in order to generate interest. How hard must it be to actually be a professional tennis player in America when all of the superstars are European? First they need to make it available to the public and do some promos. On the local channels you never see anything about tennis, only four times a year with the slams and the occasional Masters. It's hard for them to even get a following here, let alone globally. -
-
general masterclass:
how do you rate andy's chances at Wimbledon? -
-
Sampras didn't have any charisma or so they say but it didn't stop him from being a great player. One can be popular but not necessarily successful. There are no great and talented players in the current bunch simply put. Not to that caliber anyway.
-
-
Regarding American tennis, i.e. USA, you all have good points. Tennis has never been a prime time sport in the USA. It might be 5th or 6th on the list at best. So Tennis fights for athletes and dollars at all levels and generally comes up short. The best athletes in the US play US Football, Major League Baseball, NBA Basketball, and NHL Hockey. The slightly lesser athletes play in the minor leagues of those sports or in college. So which athletes are left to play tennis? Mostly, the guys that weren't good enough to compete in those other sports.
Europe and much of the rest of the sporting world primarily have 1 huge money sport that take the best athletes, football or soccer as the US would say it. That leaves tennis a better pool of athletes.
Women's tennis in the USA is better off because they don't have the domination of other professional sports that the men have, and thanks to players like Billie Jean King, Chris Evert, Martina Navrotilova and others, the women make the same money as the men today in the bigger tournaments. So many women interested in professional sports in the USA choose tennis.
One advantage in the USA, is that one can usually find a tennis court to play on anywhere for free. The problem comes when you want to go from recreational tennis to league tennis. Then the costs can increase. Usually you have to belong to a club, then you need a trainer/coach, etc.. Many play at the collegiate level if they have that opportunity.
Still, the USA has produced some of the world's best tennis players over the years until the 21st century. This is definitely a dry spell. I just don't see the same drive to be the best in the world in the players today. John Isner probably has the best mentality of any of them, but his unusual height, though great for serving, leaves him prone to injury and fitness issues. The others don't seem to have it between the ears, or they have physical issues, or insufficient ambition to be the best.
I'm not sure the USTA is making all the right decisions and doing the best they can do with the resources they have. I think some new thinking or thinking outside the box is needed. Pouring more money into the Tennis Center in New York for the US Open is not the way to go in my opinion. I think they need to put money into competitive league play for younger players to develop, something creative that would generate more interest in the public. I also think it is time to move the US Open. It has been moved a few times in its history.
-----------
If I were running things for the USTA and tennis as a whole, I would go for some change. Don't spend the money on an ultra expensive roof for behemoth Arthur Ashe stadium. Instead, I would go to Larry Ellison and offer him a deal he couldn't refuse. Move the US Open to sunny Indian Wells and have Larry convert the courts to grass. Help Cincinnati to convert as well. Have grass instead of hard courts in the North American summer and extend the grass season. Change the Sony Miami Open to clay and fit it in with the rest of the clay season. No more SLOW hard courts. This physically destroys the players joints trying to end points playing hours on slow hard courts.
Then we could have a tennis season that starts on the clay in February in South/Central/North America, moves to the European clay all the way till the French Open in early-mid May at Rafael Garros. Adds 1 additional Clay Masters by converting Miami. Start the European grass season around Jun 1 culminating with Wimbledon in July, then travel to North America for the summer grass season culminating with the US Open on grass at Indian Wells in late Aug-September. Adds two, maybe 3 grass masters and 1 major. Then go to hard courts and play outdoors and indoors in split locations (convenient to player home base) culminating with the Australian Open in early November. Then 2 weeks later play the World Tour Finals end of November. No tennis from Dec 1 to February 1. Two full months off.
Surface continuity - Clay > Grass > Outdoor/Indoor Hard Courts.
Travel continuity - Clay (South, Central, North America, Europe), Grass (Europe, North America), Outdoor/Indoor Hard Courts (North America, Europe, Mid East, Far East, Australia), WTF(change locations every 3 years)
Produces Health Benefits. More Natural surface play (Feb to Sept). Build the foundation on slower clay before moving to the faster surfaces (grass and hard courts). On outdoor/indoor hard courts, having multi regional play will split the player pool, so that all top players are not meeting as often late in the year, purposely diluting the competition, also giving more of an opportunity for the lower echelon players to go deeper in the tournaments. Two full months off gives more time for players to recuperate from the season (unless they play exhibitions, then I have no sympathy for their complaints)
Slam surfaces - RG (slow clay), Wimbledon (medium bounce grass - like today), US Open (low bounce grass - like yesteryear), Australian Open (medium fast hard court - not medium slow)
Masters surfaces: clay - (Miami, Monte Carlo, Rome), grass - (Halle, Boston?, Cincinnati), hard - ( Canada, Shanghai, Paris-Bercy)
Masters schedule: At least 1 week off between masters, nothing back to back, and restore best of 5 final.
Madrid? Whatever Tiriac wants. Depending on the surface he chooses, he might have to move the dates.
Might have to tweak a few things, but this would be my general master plan for tennis.
Respectfully,
masterclass -
-
general masterclass:
how do you rate andy's chances at Wimbledon?
If Mr. Murray, OBE, remains relatively healthy, he should be nearly match tough against the top players by that point. His lack of clay season proficiency is probably a wash. He gets a bit more rest before the grass season, as he doesn't tend to go deep in all of the clay tournaments, but then he lacks for finals type play. He surely has confidence at Wimbledon. It will of course, like any other player, depend on how his draw plays out, but having won a title, and another time a finalist, he certainly is somewhere in the top 4 from the current group of players in my opinion. Federer, Nadal (if he makes the second week), Murray, Djokovic. If a couple of those get ousted early, then the others have even a better chance and it might give some of the other competent Wimbledon grass players like Berdych, Tsonga, and recently Del Potro a chance.
If he stays healthy, I think Andy might be in even better form by the US Open, but that event is usually more competitive as there are many more players that have good ability on hard courts than grass.
It's tough to predict results among top players on the day of a match, much less so far in advance, so who really knows? There is such a small margin and can just depend on who has better form on the day and the particular match-up.
Based on their historical prowess, I could pick Rafa at RG (
, Roger at Wimbledon (7), and Roger at the US Open (5). But that leaves out Murray, Djokovic, Wawrinka, Del Potro, all slam winners, and all but Del Potro with fairly recent success. In the last 2 years worth of majors, since Feb 2012, Nadal has won 3 majors, Murray 2, Federer, Djokovic, and Wawrinka 1 each. But it still doesn't matter. Del Potro is a slam champion. When healthy, he has a big game and can defeat any of these players. Some other player, like Wawrinka, can come from the other group of good players. It seems about time for that to happen. I think we are entering a transitional cycle.
But I wish good luck and good health to all the players.
Respectfully,
masterclass -
-
fantastic posts general.
I will have more time this evening to respond more properly.
with respect to tennis in America, it is the cultural dynamics at play as well. and we can add to that the money factor.
players outside top 300 are starving to death. they have to beg, borrow, and steal just to make it.
they have to live with friends and relatives or sleep on the subway.
that is not the case in baseball, basketball, and football.
also you are on the tele every single week if you are playing football for bigger schools like Alabama, florida, texas, and the like.
you start getting huge exposure very early on in football.
team sports, for the americans, are vital to develop tomorrow's leaders.
I will have more to say on this later tonight. -
-
general masterclass I will be gone for most of the day and wont return until about 6 pm.
show general CETSVids how to modify boards and make changes if he needs help.
perhaps you can make a list of instructions on his board for him to see.
I listed some instructions too but I am not sure if they are enough.
I cant do anything with my iphone when I am out and about and running around. -