Djoko now has a winning record against both nadal and Federer. Still a chance he can go down as the goat if his body doesn’t break down again
I dont think that he would be the goat. I also dont think he'll be able to catch up to Nadal or Federer in the amount of grand slams victories. They both still got a chance to win more and there alredy is a big difference now.
I don't think Nadal would finish with 17 grand slams. he still got the Roland-Garros to win some more
I think Nadal will over take Fed at some point. I don't see when he will ever lose on clay. If he get get one of the others that will just add to his total.
I think it's very plausible. But fed still I agree. it's very plausible but Fed might win some more and we don't know how longer Nadal would play.
This is a random thought, but it dawned on me while watching the US Open today. We marvel (understandably) at the longevity of players like Roger Federer and Serena Williams in a sport that, in previous generations, was notorious for burning out players before they turned 30. But it's not as if this type of longevity is an isolated incident that will come and go with the careers of two once-in-a-lifetime players. Rank-and-file players in the sport are enjoying incredibly lengthy careers as well. At this very moment, for example, I'm watching a first round match between Marcos Baghdatis and Mikhail Youzhny, two players I closely associate with first getting in tennis when I was a kid. The best years of these respective players' careers came waaaaaaaay back in 2006, when Baghdatis made the final of the Aussie and a semifinal at Wimbledon and Youzhny made the semis at the US Open. I suppose you could make a case that Youzhny's 2010 was better than 2006, given that he made the quarters at the French and then another semi appearance at the US Open, but still, that's eight long years ago. There was a period of time in tennis when most careers, even of accomplished players, were lucky to stretch beyond eight years total. It's just bonkers how much the sport has changed in a relatively short amount of time.
Isner having so little in his game beyond his serve drives most tennis fans nuts, and I will admit that it doesn't make for fun tennis to watch, but it makes him one of the most fascinating players in the game to me. As one-dimensional as he is, that one dimension is so dominant that it has carried him inside the top ten several times. It's enough to make you think that if he was even ten percent better on the return of serve or a ten percent better mover, he would be a consistent second week player at majors. Of course, the presence of the big four makes doing anything beyond that pretty difficult for everyone. But he's not those things, so instead he's been a consistently good, but not great player who hasn't always done a ton in majors who just happens to have the biggest single weapon in tennis.
I played in high school and was a top 100 player in texas. My game was only my serve and forehand. So I respect the man lol.
Not sure what to think about Federer's loss on Monday night. On the one hand, these things happen. The conditions were really tough, Fed admitted they bothered him a bit in his post-match press conference, and at this stage of his career, he's also not a player exempt from having off nights. To top it off, John Millman is exactly the type of player you DON'T want to see in those types of conditions when you're also having an off night. What he lacks in talent or a big-time weapon, he makes up for in chasing down every ball and doing everything he can to push you into imploding. Maybe it was just a confluence of factors that combined to take down this version of Federer, who isn't as infallible as he once was. On the other hand, it's hard not to wonder if time is beginning to catch up with him. He admitted in post-match that the conditions got to him, which is something you never saw in the past, much less enough to where he would admit to as much in a press conference. That's to say nothing of the obvious, which is that, even as his career has hit speed bumps in the past, he never would have struggled with a player like Millman, even on a bad night.
I think fed retires after next years Wimbledon. Anyways holy **** I haven’t seen a player hit as big as Thiem since Del Potro at the 09 US open before his injuries.
Really great. On the one hand what do you have to do to beat these top guys? On the other hand, Thiem plays reckless as heck. Are there any sites or studies relative to tennis analytics and play style effectiveness?
That was one of the most fun matches I’ve ever seen. I think Thiem will have a few years as the best player in the world in about 4 years. He needs to control the unforced errors, but he can play. He had his shots but nerves got to him in that 3rd set.
I wanna say you just have to be better to beat the top guys but it's seens impossible. about your second question maybe this video would help(a bit old): http://www.sloansportsconference.com/content/tennis-analytics/ I know that there are some apps/softwares for coaches that help with statistics and analyzing data. I also found this article interesting https://www.google.co.il/amp/s/www....ar-behind-other-sports-in-data-analytics/amp/
