A Sea Change is Occuring

[El Dude]

Stan Wawrinka has pretty much changed the definition of what is possible and is a great role model for players like Dimitrov. Stan ended 2010 the same age Grigor is now: 25. At that time he had only ever made a QF once, won only two low level titles, and never finished a year higher than #13. Grigor has made a SF and QF, has won four titles, and finished 2014 #11, ranked as high as #8 that year. In other words, he's had a slightly better career than Stan at the same point.

Now I'm not saying that Grigor will follow the same path as Stan, because Stan's path is very rare. In fact, no one has done what he's done: won three Slams after turning age 28, without winning any before. But my point is, all players should look at Stan and think, "If he did that, I don't see why I can't do something similar."

 

[Carol]

Carol, it goes without saying that no one knows what will happen, but it is fun to think about, no? So what's the problem? Oh, right--you don't like the fact that I see Rafa (and Roger) fading into the night. :cry

That said, I do see a scenario where Rafa wins one more...it is less than likely at this point, but I'd give him a greater chance at winning Roland Garros than I would Roger at winning Wimbledon. But how awesome would it be if they both won their favored Slams next year?

El Dude, you must have a Bulgarian background or something of that sort, otherwise why would you keeping overselling Grigoruzzled

Haha, not Bulgarian. But seriously, the reason I keep Grigor in the mix is that he is a chronic underachiever, a player capable of a very high level of play--at least as high as Kei and Milos--and he's the type of player that could catch fire and win a Masters. I mean, why not? I know he's a disaster, but I don't see why he couldn't not be a disaster for a couple weeks in a row and win a Masters. I'm not saying that it will happen, but that it could.

Of course is fun to figure if this one or the other one is going to do this or that, the problem is to the way that everything is going (starting with the youngest) is difficult to know the future uzzled
Why some of you like to put Rafa and Roger in the same package? nothing in common, they seem they are friends but talking about what they can do playing is a very different story, two different cases and 5 years apart. If Roger would be able to win Wimbledon (it's very less than likely) then Rafa could win two more GS for sure.
The day that Grigor, Kyrgios, Kei, Raonic, Pouille etc win a MS then I will ring the bells :roll eyes:
Wawrinka? I don't see him winning a GS anymore unless the rest of the top players would be injured or playing like #$%t. Maybe Delpo has a chance if his wrist are ok. Cilic, Tsonga, Monfils, Berdych and etc.....nah. It's a shame that the tour can't be better and more the youngest who seem to be still in pampers, maybe they have a chance in 2018? uzzled

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/im-ready-to-die-to-get-back-to-winning-grand-slams-again-rz265hw7v

 

[Front242]

^ Indeed they are 2 very different cases and age is not the only determining factor at all. Style of play and wear and tear are the main things to focus on. These are Nadal's slam results in the last 2 last years:

2015 QF, QF, 2R, 3R
2016 1R, 3R, A, 4R

Here are Federer's:

2015 3R, QF, F, F
2016 SF, A, SF, A

Not really too much of a hunch that El Dude and others are going on based on 2 year's worth of results which show Federer's attacking tennis is still getting him way deeper in slams than Nadal. So forget the age part. They've clearly declined differently.

The good news for you and other Nadal fans is Nadal says ""I'm going to die to be ready again to compete for everything". Now either that means he's going back full retard on the PEDs or he's actually gonna give it one last big push and die before the next slam even starts

http://www.news18.com/news/sports/ready-to-die-to-win-another-grand-slam-says-rafael-nadal-1308459.html

 

[Kieran]

Maybe he should take Mirka's milk, buddy, that seems to have kept Mr Federer young and sharp and quick-witted around the court. Of course, that would have meant Rafa would have had to skip the Olympics...

 

[Front242]

Sharpness and wit are inate traits. Speed and fitness can be enhanced as we all know.

 

[Kieran]

Sharpness and wit are inate traits. Speed and fitness can be enhanced as we all know.

Reflexes die as we get older, brother, especially for players who reach their late 20's, let alone their mid-30's. Anyhow, many of the attributes of any top players can be artifially enhanced by scoundrel behaviour, including swift nifters that delay the onset of ageing.

As for Rafa's attitude that he's gonna fight to the death to win another slam, to that I say...Vamos! :clap

 

[Carol]

^ Indeed they are 2 very different cases and age is not the only determining factor at all. Style of play and wear and tear are the main things to focus on. These are Nadal's slam results in the last 2 last years:

2015 QF, QF, 2R, 3R
2016 1R, 3R, A, 4R

Here are Federer's:

2015 3R, QF, F, F
2016 SF, A, SF, A

Not really too much of a hunch that El Dude and others are going on based on 2 year's worth of results which show Federer's attacking tennis is still getting him way deeper in slams than Nadal. So forget the age part. They've clearly declined differently.

The good news for you and other Nadal fans is Nadal says ""I'm going to die to be ready again to compete for everything". Now either that means he's going back full retard on the PEDs or he's actually gonna give it one last big push and die before the next slam even starts

http://www.news18.com/news/sports/ready-to-die-to-win-another-grand-slam-says-rafael-nadal-1308459.html

Well, then according to your mentality we also should think the same (full retard on the PED's) about Federer how he could had that attacking tennis getting deeper in slams these last two years at his age....uzzled

 

[Front242]

That makes no sense, Carol, sorry. Maybe to you it does but to the rest of us, it doesn't. Ending points quicker makes winning easier. It's not hard to grasp. Nadal doesn't do that and therefore it's much harder for him to win, hence why an older Federer does much better.

 

[Carol]

That makes no sense, Carol, sorry. Maybe to you it does but to the rest of us, it doesn't. Ending points quicker makes winning easier. It's not hard to grasp. Nadal doesn't do that and therefore it's much harder for him to win, hence why an older Federer does much better.

Of course for the rest of some of you it doesn't make sense but for the rest of the world it does when we have seen Roger the last two years more fast (running) than ever and by the way not doing so easier points like you like to say

 

[lacatch]

That makes no sense, Carol, sorry. Maybe to you it does but to the rest of us, it doesn't. Ending points quicker makes winning easier. It's not hard to grasp. Nadal doesn't do that and therefore it's much harder for him to win, hence why an older Federer does much better.

Of course for the rest of some of you it doesn't make sense but for the rest of the world it does when we have seen Roger the last two years more fast (running) than ever and by the way not doing so easier points like you like to say

1. No, Carol, Roger has not been running faster than ever. It's clear to those who watch his matches (and the commentators) that he's lost a bit of speed, but is still amazingly quick for mid 30s.

2)Yes, Carol--he has DEFINITELY been trying to end points more quickly: a)he's serving and volleying more than ever since his early career; and b)He's gotten more aggressive in playing a more attacking style. He's not always SUCCESSFUL at a&b, but his strategy is clear.

One doesn't have to LIKE Roger to agree with these statements, but facts are facts.

 

[Front242]

That makes no sense, Carol, sorry. Maybe to you it does but to the rest of us, it doesn't. Ending points quicker makes winning easier. It's not hard to grasp. Nadal doesn't do that and therefore it's much harder for him to win, hence why an older Federer does much better.

Of course for the rest of some of you it doesn't make sense but for the rest of the world it does when we have seen Roger the last two years more fast (running) than ever and by the way not doing so easier points like you like to say

Running faster than ever? LOL. Have you seen how many shanks he hits these days? Why is that do you reckon? I'll tell you. It's because he's slower getting in position due to loss of speed, meaning he is most definitely not faster than ever. It's especially evident for years when running to his forehand side that he is slower getting in position and therefore his forehand down the line misfires a lot. You're living in dream land, sorry. Roger used to have the most deadly forehand in tennis in his prime. Now it's nothing like that anymore. He's still very good but shots that would've ended rallies years ago no longer do and a lot of that has to do with him not getting to them in time to hit them cleanly because he's SLOWER.

 

[Carol]

That makes no sense, Carol, sorry. Maybe to you it does but to the rest of us, it doesn't. Ending points quicker makes winning easier. It's not hard to grasp. Nadal doesn't do that and therefore it's much harder for him to win, hence why an older Federer does much better.

Of course for the rest of some of you it doesn't make sense but for the rest of the world it does when we have seen Roger the last two years more fast (running) than ever and by the way not doing so easier points like you like to say

Running faster than ever? LOL. Have you seen how many shanks he hits these days? Why is that do you reckon? I'll tell you. It's because he's slower getting in position due to loss of speed, meaning he is most definitely not faster than ever. It's especially evident for years when running to his forehand side that he is slower getting in position and therefore his forehand down the line misfires a lot. You're living in dream land, sorry. Roger used to have the most deadly forehand in tennis in his prime. Now it's nothing like that anymore. He's still very good but shots that would've ended rallies years ago no longer do and a lot of that has to do with him not getting to them in time to hit them cleanly because he's SLOWER.

Before the knee injury he was running faster than ever :wow::velo:

 

[Kieran]

Oh dear, Carol's stalkers are hounding her again.

Fact: reflexes and the ability to "end points quicker" are badly affected by ageing. Especially when you've got all those miles on the clock. In fact, to be still doing it in your mid-30's is miraculous. Little wonder he pulled out of the Olympics. I remember brother Front telling us there'd be athletes and players who'd want to avoid the trip to Rio, and you weren't wrong, brother...

 

[Front242]

Of course for the rest of some of you it doesn't make sense but for the rest of the world it does when we have seen Roger the last two years more fast (running) than ever and by the way not doing so easier points like you like to say

Running faster than ever? LOL. Have you seen how many shanks he hits these days? Why is that do you reckon? I'll tell you. It's because he's slower getting in position due to loss of speed, meaning he is most definitely not faster than ever. It's especially evident for years when running to his forehand side that he is slower getting in position and therefore his forehand down the line misfires a lot. You're living in dream land, sorry. Roger used to have the most deadly forehand in tennis in his prime. Now it's nothing like that anymore. He's still very good but shots that would've ended rallies years ago no longer do and a lot of that has to do with him not getting to them in time to hit them cleanly because he's SLOWER.

Before the knee injury he was running faster than ever :wow::velo:

No he wasn't. You're basing him running more as him running faster. (A) That was the AO, the slowest slam surface of all, probably slower than RG at this stage and (B) he was playing Novak so of course he was running more for 2 reasons, one of which I've already pointed out. Roger is slower and his forehand is nothing like what it was. So he ends up playing longer points. Also the court is slower since 2008 at the AO so it's way harder to hit winners. Therefore you run more. Getting it yet? He doesn't play as many long points against guys who never get tired though. But you don't get faster as you get older.

 

[Front242]

Oh dear, Carol's stalkers are hounding her again.

Fact: reflexes and the ability to "end points quicker" are badly affected by ageing. Especially when you've got all those miles on the clock. In fact, to be still doing it in your mid-30's is miraculous. Little wonder he pulled out of the Olympics. I remember brother Front telling us there'd be athletes and players who'd want to avoid the trip to Rio, and you weren't wrong, brother...

She asks for it, Kieran with dumb comments that Federer is faster than ever. No one is stalking her, we're simply baffled by the stupidity of it all. Maybe you didn't see Roger falling flat on his nose at Wimbledon against Raonic? Or you could just continue to post nonsense about him avoid drug tests. Shame you're a fan of the number one doping suspect though lol.

 

[Kieran]

Oh dear, Carol's stalkers are hounding her again.

Fact: reflexes and the ability to "end points quicker" are badly affected by ageing. Especially when you've got all those miles on the clock. In fact, to be still doing it in your mid-30's is miraculous. Little wonder he pulled out of the Olympics. I remember brother Front telling us there'd be athletes and players who'd want to avoid the trip to Rio, and you weren't wrong, brother...

She asks for it, Kieran with dumb comments that Federer is faster than ever. No one is stalking her, we're simply baffled by the stupidity of it all. Maybe you didn't see Roger falling flat on his nose at Wimbledon against Raonic? Or you could just continue to post nonsense about him avoid drug tests. Shame you're a fan of the number one doping suspect though lol.

Well, he's not a suspect of anything, except to Fedfans like you. But you get a tiny tinkle when you see Carol post, and it causes inconsistencies in your own analytical procedures, my friend. Other people might even conclude that you're biased, and unwilling to apply to Federer the same discourtesies you extend to his opponents.

Anyway, Ireland are thrashing the All-Blacks. Good! :clap

 

[Front242]

Oh dear, Carol's stalkers are hounding her again.

Fact: reflexes and the ability to "end points quicker" are badly affected by ageing. Especially when you've got all those miles on the clock. In fact, to be still doing it in your mid-30's is miraculous. Little wonder he pulled out of the Olympics. I remember brother Front telling us there'd be athletes and players who'd want to avoid the trip to Rio, and you weren't wrong, brother...

She asks for it, Kieran with dumb comments that Federer is faster than ever. No one is stalking her, we're simply baffled by the stupidity of it all. Maybe you didn't see Roger falling flat on his nose at Wimbledon against Raonic? Or you could just continue to post nonsense about him avoid drug tests. Shame you're a fan of the number one doping suspect though lol.

Well, he's not a suspect of anything, except to Fedfans like you. But you get a tiny tinkle when you see Carol post, and it causes inconsistencies in your own analytical procedures, my friend. Other people might even conclude that you're biased, and unwilling to apply to Federer the same discourtesies you extend to his opponents.

Anyway, Ireland are thrashing the All-Blacks. Good! :clap

What inconsistencies would those be? I was simply debating the nonsense assertion that Roger at 34/35 is faster than ever which is absolute total and utter bs. How anyone would need to analyze anything when their eyes can see perfectly well is beyond me. Except hers of course as she thinks he's faster than ever lol. Btw, I hadn't mentioned a single thing about doping as we were debating the bs notion that Roger is faster than ever but to reply to your comment about Rio, I made it perfectly clear (which you've forgotten it seems) that I meant any athletes with a sudden injury out of the blue missing Rio should be treated as suspicious. Not a player would had an injury in January. The Olympics were in August :cover

PS: no interest in rugby Bunch of hairy fellas jumping on each other isn't my cup of tea but good for Ireland at least.

 

[Kieran]

PS: no interest in rugby Bunch of hairy fellas jumping on each other isn't my cup of tea but good for Ireland at least.

We've gone through all your inconsistencies before, just pout our names in the search engine and maybe 75% of our posts over the last ten years refer to it. :snicker

You don't like Gaelic fupple, or hurling, mainly because the Dubs are giving me bragging rights in the football, and the whole of the rest of Ireland are still in mourning.

And you don't like rugby either - well I'm not a huge rugby fan, but...the All-Blacks have been smashing every record under the sun for years - and we've never beaten them. But now we're ahead 33-22, with 20 minutes left. It was 30-8, but they're starting to respond... :sofa:

Of course, it's not on television. Not even on Sky. BT have bought the rights... :cover

By the way, do you watch The Walking Dead?

 

[Front242]

PS: no interest in rugby Bunch of hairy fellas jumping on each other isn't my cup of tea but good for Ireland at least.

We've gone through all your inconsistencies before, just pout our names in the search engine and maybe 75% of our posts over the last ten years refer to it. :snicker

You don't like Gaelic fupple, or hurling, mainly because the Dubs are giving me bragging rights in the football, and the whole of the rest of Ireland are still in mourning.

And you don't like rugby either - well I'm not a huge rugby fan, but...the All-Blacks have been smashing every record under the sun for years - and we've never beaten them. But now we're ahead 33-22, with 20 minutes left. It was 30-8, but they're starting to respond... :sofa:

Of course, it's not on television. Not even on Sky. BT have bought the rights... :cover

By the way, do you watch The Walking Dead?

Only sport I follow these days is tennis Used to watch soccer but Klinsmann ruined it when he started the diving craze. If they brought in action replays and sent players off for diving for penalties and free kicks like they're auditioning for the next Superman I might watch it now and then but seeing these pu$$ie$ dive into the air and then roll around like Ronnie Coleman just kicked them in the face is downright embarrassing. A total disgrace to the male population imo. Ronaldo and Drogba took diving to new levels of embarrassment.

Have The Walking Dead downloaded and would gladly watch it but my wife doesn't watch those kind of things so I'd have to watch it on my own but never get around to it. Looks nice and gory though so I must watch it soon alright.

 

[kskate2]

You should chat w/ Kieran and the other gents in the TV forum about the many tv shows they're binging.