Australian Open Day 4: Thursday, Jan 21 - Order of Play

[Front242]

Pretty pathetic by Verdasco alright. He had a big opportunity to do well here or at least a whole lot better than losing in the 2nd round. Even if he was a bit fatigued he shouldn't lose to Sela of all people. And he shouldn't really have been that tired after just 1 match anyway.

Verdasco is a 32 year old! Of course he should be tired after a long match, especially a big match against a player like Nadal. :cover

You're too used to Federer's unprecedented stamina and endurance, you think they're all like that... :nono

Even more pathetic than Verdasco is you thinking Federer's stamina and endurance is unprecedented. It is not. In fact not even close. How many times do people have to type the obvious?! Go back and watch some long matches where Roger loses because he gets tired. AO 2013 against Murray is a prime example. There's a reason every logical thinking fan and commentator keep reiterating that to win a slam or even go deep, Roger needs to win easy and in as few sets as possible. If he doesn't, he will lose as his stamina is nothing like what you claim. What happened today is a classic case of winning big and the inevitable letdown afterwards. It's one of the safest patterns in betting that the guy who gets a big scalp loses his next match dismally. Doesn't make it any less embarrassing though losing to Dudi freakin' Sela. 5'9" and ranked 87 in the world. That's a joke losing to him.

The exception to this ugly phenomenon is the sadly retired Robin Soderling who made the most of his big wins reaching the Roland Garros final 2 straight in years in a row, firstly by dispatching Nadal and the year after Federer. But this as we can see doesn't happen often. Still, major oppotunity blown by Verdasco.

 

[Front242]

^ Roger plays aggressive tennis to win quickly. He does not ever win matches because of his stamina as this is (thankfully) not how he plays. You're a bit mixed up there. He was never a grinder and never will be. Players with aggressive games don't tend to have as much stamina as they focus more on winning quicker and easier.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Talking of Soderling, at the beginning of this year he finally officially announced that he is done.
Front was hoping he would come back and so I am mentioning it.

 

[Front242]

Yeah, GSM. Utterly disappointed that he wasn't able to come back. Especially since Brian Baker came back after almost 3 years of no play and got to 4 tiebreakers in his first comeback match and he's had an absolute TON of surgeries/injuries. So it can be done.

 

[Kieran]

^ Roger plays aggressive tennis to win quickly. He does not ever win matches because of his stamina as this is (thankfully) not how he plays. You're a bit mixed up there. He was never a grinder and never will be. Players with aggressive games don't tend to have as much stamina as they focus more on winning quicker and easier.

Actually he won almost all his majors from the baseline. For true first-strike players like Sampras, a long rally consisted of having to hit a second serve. Hasn't skipped a slam since before the Great War. Plays year round, unlike Rafa, or Pete, who took (enforced) breathers at certain stages of the season. He's won more matches than Daveed Ferrer has actually played.

Trust me, Federer has awesome stamina and endurance...

 

[Carol]

Soderling and his too long sickness...but at least his wife got pregnant when he was in those conditions, Roger was too lucky that his mono last not too long ......

 

[Front242]

Soderling and his too long sickness...but at least his wife got pregnant when he was in those conditions, Roger was too lucky that his mono last not too long ......

It lasted around 6 months and he has 4 kids which is more than enough for anyone :s

 

[Front242]

^ Roger plays aggressive tennis to win quickly. He does not ever win matches because of his stamina as this is (thankfully) not how he plays. You're a bit mixed up there. He was never a grinder and never will be. Players with aggressive games don't tend to have as much stamina as they focus more on winning quicker and easier.

Actually he won almost all his majors from the baseline. For true first-strike players like Sampras, a long rally consisted of having to hit a second serve. Hasn't skipped a slam since before the Great War. Plays year round, unlike Rafa, or Pete, who took (enforced) breathers at certain stages of the season. He's won more matches than Daveed Ferrer has actually played.

Trust me, Federer has awesome stamina and endurance...

I don't trust you and he doesn't You can win from the baseline without playing massive long matches day in, day out losing sets to nobodies. His exemplary, aggressive shot making skills means he wins quicker and easier than grinders and counter punchers. His game style again is why he's rarely injured and nothing to do with endurance or stamina. No players out there would skip a slam citing fatigue unless it was after mono or some other energy sapping illness so the reason he's been in so many consecutive slams is not stamina or endurance but intelligence, ie intelligent play rewarded by shorter matches. Of course he's had long matches in his career, everyone has at some stage, but his average match length is way shorter than most of the top guys out there and this why he is still out there playing very high level tennis. He hasn't burnt himself out and winning quicker and easier was a winning plan for longevity. Someone should add up the total amount of time spent on court for both Federer and Nadal. The difference is massive and yet Federer has played for longer on tour. That is why he's fresher and still playing well at 34 and is a testament to a higher tennis IQ than running down every ball like his life depended on it.

If Nadal fans like yourself are unhappy that Federer is more light on his feet than Nadal these days, you can blame only one person for that and that is Nadal himself for choosing to play like he does. Maybe his uncle as well for making him play that way for his whole career. Federer always has and always will win matches easier and shorter because of how he plays and there's your "stamina and endurance" claim right there. Of course he's fresher 'cos he's not out there all day against everyone.

Federer plays year round but nowhere near as much as Ferrer who you cited and also, his average match length is way shorter than Ferrer's. And he schedules very intelligently. For example, he didn't play a full season last year as he skipped 2 masters and it's been well documented that was the only reason he dropped back temporarily to number 3.

Btw, I'm sure you remember Roger admitting he tanked sets 3 and 4 to conserve energy for set 5 against Djokovic in the 2011 USO. Hardly what you'd expect from someone with what you claim is awesome stamina and endurance...clearly he doesn't have awesome stamina and endurance or he wouldn't have needed to do that. These days if he doesn't win fast, he doesn't win at all against the top players so, again, stamina is not at all on his side.

 

[Kieran]

^ Roger plays aggressive tennis to win quickly. He does not ever win matches because of his stamina as this is (thankfully) not how he plays. You're a bit mixed up there. He was never a grinder and never will be. Players with aggressive games don't tend to have as much stamina as they focus more on winning quicker and easier.

Actually he won almost all his majors from the baseline. For true first-strike players like Sampras, a long rally consisted of having to hit a second serve. Hasn't skipped a slam since before the Great War. Plays year round, unlike Rafa, or Pete, who took (enforced) breathers at certain stages of the season. He's won more matches than Daveed Ferrer has actually played.

Trust me, Federer has awesome stamina and endurance...

I don't trust you and he doesn't You can win from the baseline without playing massive long matches day in, day out losing sets to nobodies. His exemplary, aggressive shot making skills means he wins quicker and easier than grinders and counter punchers. His game style again is why he's rarely injured and nothing to do with endurance or stamina. No players out there would skip a slam citing fatigue unless it was after mono or some other energy sapping illness so the reason he's been in so many consecutive slams is not stamina or endurance but intelligence, ie intelligent play rewarded by shorter matches. Of course he's had long matches in his career, everyone has at some stage, but his average match length is way shorter than most of the top guys out there and this why he is still out there playing very high level tennis. He hasn't burnt himself out and winning quicker and easier was a winning plan for longevity. Someone should add up the total amount of time spent on court for both Federer and Nadal. The difference is massive and yet Federer has played for longer on tour. That is why he's fresher and still playing well at 34 and is a testament to a higher tennis IQ than running down every ball like his life depended on it.

If Nadal fans like yourself are unhappy that Federer is more light on his feet than Nadal these days, you can blame only one person for that and that is Nadal himself for choosing to play like he does. Maybe his uncle as well for making him play that way for his whole career. Federer always has and always will win matches easier and shorter because of how he plays and there's your "stamina and endurance" claim right there. Of course he's fresher 'cos he's not out there all day against everyone.

Federer plays year round but nowhere near as much as Ferrer who you cited and also, his average match length is way shorter than Ferrer's. And he schedules very intelligently. For example, he didn't play a full season last year as he skipped 2 masters and it's been well documented that was the only reason he dropped back temporarily to number 3.

Brother, you're spouting propaganda. Again.

Federer has won more matches than Daveed has actually played. And he's older than him. He maybe more efficient in how he plays - marginally :snicker - but that's a humongous amount of miles on the clock, regardless. Playing aggressively takes energy. A lot of it. And like I say, he wasn't playing first strike tennis, he was duking it out from the back court.

Blokes like Pete played much shorter rallies than Federer, and didn't blip on the radar on clay, and still the wear and tear took its toll on Pete - aged 27! When he skipped the Oz Open in 1999, citing fatigue of all things. Oz, as you know, is the first slam of the year. This is brutal, unforgiving tour they're on.

You wrote something that made me LOL: "No players out there would skip a slam citing fatigue unless it was after mono or some other energy sapping illness so the reason he's been in so many consecutive slams is not stamina or endurance but intelligence"

As I say, LOL: Federer had mono and he didn't skip a slam. In fact, he played for almost 5 hours in the sapping heat with mono, and two days later dispatched the Birdman in straights. Two days after this, I think it was Blakey. :cover

Incredible conditioning, bro. Endurance and stamina. He prolly has a portrait in his attic which is sitting in a commentary box.

Now, the reason I bring this up all the time is to help you apply your own considerable intelligence fairly. You can't attack Nadal and Ferrer with your fantasies, and ignore the grinning fantasy that's staring you straight in the mush...

 

[Carol]

Ok, Nadal/ Federer, Federer/Nadal, but what about the stamina and the strength of Novak? he never is tired, he reachs the most impossible balls, in the years that I'm watching this sport I've never seen something like that, no doubts about his diet is working well

 

[Front242]

Actually he won almost all his majors from the baseline. For true first-strike players like Sampras, a long rally consisted of having to hit a second serve. Hasn't skipped a slam since before the Great War. Plays year round, unlike Rafa, or Pete, who took (enforced) breathers at certain stages of the season. He's won more matches than Daveed Ferrer has actually played.

Trust me, Federer has awesome stamina and endurance...

I don't trust you and he doesn't You can win from the baseline without playing massive long matches day in, day out losing sets to nobodies. His exemplary, aggressive shot making skills means he wins quicker and easier than grinders and counter punchers. His game style again is why he's rarely injured and nothing to do with endurance or stamina. No players out there would skip a slam citing fatigue unless it was after mono or some other energy sapping illness so the reason he's been in so many consecutive slams is not stamina or endurance but intelligence, ie intelligent play rewarded by shorter matches. Of course he's had long matches in his career, everyone has at some stage, but his average match length is way shorter than most of the top guys out there and this why he is still out there playing very high level tennis. He hasn't burnt himself out and winning quicker and easier was a winning plan for longevity. Someone should add up the total amount of time spent on court for both Federer and Nadal. The difference is massive and yet Federer has played for longer on tour. That is why he's fresher and still playing well at 34 and is a testament to a higher tennis IQ than running down every ball like his life depended on it.

If Nadal fans like yourself are unhappy that Federer is more light on his feet than Nadal these days, you can blame only one person for that and that is Nadal himself for choosing to play like he does. Maybe his uncle as well for making him play that way for his whole career. Federer always has and always will win matches easier and shorter because of how he plays and there's your "stamina and endurance" claim right there. Of course he's fresher 'cos he's not out there all day against everyone.

Federer plays year round but nowhere near as much as Ferrer who you cited and also, his average match length is way shorter than Ferrer's. And he schedules very intelligently. For example, he didn't play a full season last year as he skipped 2 masters and it's been well documented that was the only reason he dropped back temporarily to number 3.

Brother, you're spouting propaganda. Again.

Federer has won more matches than Daveed has actually played. And he's older than him. He maybe more efficient in how he plays - marginally :snicker - but that's a humongous amount of miles on the clock, regardless. Playing aggressively takes energy. A lot of it. And like I say, he wasn't playing first strike tennis, he was duking it out from the back court.

Blokes like Pete played much shorter rallies than Federer, and didn't blip on the radar on clay, and still the wear and tear took its toll on Pete - aged 27! When he skipped the Oz Open in 1999, citing fatigue of all things. Oz, as you know, is the first slam of the year. This is brutal, unforgiving tour they're on.

You wrote something that made me LOL: "No players out there would skip a slam citing fatigue unless it was after mono or some other energy sapping illness so the reason he's been in so many consecutive slams is not stamina or endurance but intelligence"

As I say, LOL: Federer had mono and he didn't skip a slam. In fact, he played for almost 5 hours in the sapping heat with mono, and two days later dispatched the Birdman in straights. Two days after this, I think it was Blakey. :cover

Incredible conditioning, bro. Endurance and stamina. He prolly has a portrait in his attic which is sitting in a commentary box.

Now, the reason I bring this up all the time is to help you apply your own considerable intelligence fairly. You can't attack Nadal and Ferrer with your fantasies, and ignore the grinning fantasy that's staring you straight in the mush...

You've surely enough cop on to go and read up on mono, right? It's intermittent. Some days you're not too bad and other days you're bedridden in poor Soderling's case. Read his interviews. Federer does not rally till the cows come home and run after every ball risking injury. He's not that stupid. He goes for winners at the first opportunity. This is why he's rarely injured and this is also why he's still viable at 34. Sampras used do massive and admittedly cool slam dunks but on hardcourts. Of course this is bad for the joints and it's no wonder he burnt out sooner. Same with Nadal and his endless running.

 

[Front242]

Btw, Nadal's first and last match lasted 4 hours 41 mins. Federer's first match was 1 hour 12 minutes. Seeing a pattern here? And no, Federer would not have played even half that length against Verdasco. Winning faster and easier means you don't need stamina but when it comes to the long matches there are tons of examples where Federer's "awesome stamina" you keep claiming he has was the very reason he lost :cover

 

[Kieran]

Silly, but entertaining. We should by your reckoning expect Mr Federer to continually reach slam finals well into his fifties. Why not? He goes for winners at the first opportunity! Fact is bro, he has miles on the clock which can't be tinkered with, and of course mental wear and tear which can be worse. As for mono, we've been here before. It gets tiring (except for those it doesn't tire :snicker )

As for Rafa's matches lasting so long, sure with all the itching and scratching, tugging and pulling and time violations, why wouldn't they, eh?

If you're going to apply a law, apply it evenly, bro. Makes us all look better when we do this...

 

[Front242]

Silly, but entertaining. We should by your reckoning expect Mr Federer to continually reach slam finals well into his fifties. Why not? He goes for winners at the first opportunity! Fact is bro, he has miles on the clock which can't be tinkered with, and of course mental wear and tear which can be worse. As for mono, we've been here before. It gets tiring (except for those it doesn't tire :snicker )

As for Rafa's matches lasting so long, sure with all the itching and scratching, tugging and pulling and time violations, why wouldn't they, eh?

If you're going to apply a law, apply it evenly, bro. Makes us all look better when we do this...

Those who it doesn't tire? Right and you think his results first half of 2008 were good do you? Go do some research 'cos his results were shocking by his standards the first half of that year because he couldn't train properly. And mono affects everything, not just your energy. Slow movement, timing is off on the ball. How can we possibly apply even/equal measures when you're claiming a guy who plays 1 hour 12 min matches has amazing stamina? Of course he f*****g does 'cos he's hardly on court a quarter of the time guys like Nadal are. Duh!

 

[Kieran]

Of course he has amazing stamina, buddy. Please pay attention: when he had mono he played for almost 5 hours in searing heat.

And came back two days later to dispatch the birdman in straights.

Incredible recovery and stamina.

They all have this, I just ask you to acknowledge it in your own man too.

Now, it's no longer day 4 in Oz. Chilly innit? :hug

 

[Front242]

Of course he has amazing stamina, buddy. Please pay attention: when he had mono he played for almost 5 hours in searing heat.

And came back two days later to dispatch the birdman in straights.

Incredible recovery and stamina.

They all have this, I just ask you to acknowledge it in your own man too.

Now, it's no longer day 4 in Oz. Chilly innit? :hug

And Berdych is good is he? You recall how easily Nadal beat him at Wimbledon? Berdych is not that good at all and Roger doesn't need to be anywhere near 100% to beat him in straight sets as long as he simply serves well. That's just silly. I've lifted 100kg bench press with a sore back. Roger has played 5 hours with an intermittent illness. The part that you're all too conveniently forgetting every time you mention mono.

 

[dante1976]

Ok, Nadal/ Federer, Federer/Nadal, but what about the stamina and the strength of Novak? he never is tired, he reachs the most impossible balls, in the years that I'm watching this sport I've never seen something like that, no doubts about his diet is working well

Cause he's stretching every single day
And is genetically well built for this sport... It also helps that this generation of players (well at least 90% of them today, Grigor ofc excluded ) don't go to "Hollywood lifestyle" like the "old school" guys even until the end of 90's
So all in all, dedication to the max (diet and such...) and it can pay off

 

[Kieran]

Of course he has amazing stamina, buddy. Please pay attention: when he had mono he played for almost 5 hours in searing heat.

And came back two days later to dispatch the birdman in straights.

Incredible recovery and stamina.

They all have this, I just ask you to acknowledge it in your own man too.

Now, it's no longer day 4 in Oz. Chilly innit? :hug

And Berdych is good is he? You recall how easily Nadal beat him at Wimbledon? Berdych is not that good at all and Roger doesn't need to be anywhere near 100% to beat him in straight sets as long as he simply serves well. That's just silly. I've lifted 100kg bench press with a sore back. Roger has played 5 hours with an intermittent illness. The part that you're all too conveniently forgetting every time you mention mono.

It all ties up so neatly, brother. Like a Lee Childs, or Harlen Coban nobble...

 

[Carol]

Ok, Nadal/ Federer, Federer/Nadal, but what about the stamina and the strength of Novak? he never is tired, he reachs the most impossible balls, in the years that I'm watching this sport I've never seen something like that, no doubts about his diet is working well

Cause he's stretching every single day
And is genetically well built for this sport... It also helps that this generation of players (well at least 90% of them today, Grigor ofc excluded ) don't go to "Hollywood lifestyle" like the "old school" guys even until the end of 90's
So all in all, dedication to the max (diet and such...) and it can pay off

I see how much it helps to the new generation of players....they are able to win MS by MS and some GS too, they look to be very fitted.......you should exclude more than one :snicker :huh: