Is Stanimal the prototype for the future champion?

[GameSetAndMath]

One handed backhand may be difficult standing way back on clay courts, but I still think one handed backhand has its place in the game on other surfaces. Unfortunately, nobody teaches that art to kids anymore and so it is on the way out. Hope, it comes back again though.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I also do not think that excessive power will not become part of the prototype. Primarily, I think such excessive power would be something difficult to sustain match after match and week after week. Moreover it may also lead to injuries. While I am no doctor, I think JMDP got screwed because of trying to put excessive power in his shots.

Of course, different players will have different level of power that they can sustain based on their physique. The point that I am trying to make is if you are going for more power than that you can sustainably generate, it won't help you in the long run.

 

[Federberg]

^Stan has the build for that sort of consistent power game though. So is Berdman

 

[Front242]

So does Tsonga but not between the ears.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^Stan has the build for that sort of consistent power game though. So is Berdman

Yes, I agree. But, to be part of the "prototype" the style should suit an average player.
But, I am not sure it is suitable for an average player.

 

[Carol]

Wawrinka is 30 years old and some people says that there is a curse when they reach the 28....really?
yeah...sure :cover :snicker
The only "curse" that I know is when there are injuries before and after to be 28, nothing else uzzled

 

[Federberg]

^Stan has the build for that sort of consistent power game though. So is Berdman

Yes, I agree. But, to be part of the "prototype" the style should suit an average player.
But, I am not sure it is suitable for an average player.

Maybe that's the sort of build the future player will tend towards?

 

[brokenshoelace]

One handed backhand may be difficult standing way back on clay courts, but I still think one handed backhand has its place in the game on other surfaces. Unfortunately, nobody teaches that art to kids anymore and so it is on the way out. Hope, it comes back again though.

Problem with one handed backhands usually is, to produce the sort of power that guys like Gasquet and Wawrinka do, you have to stand too far back to give yourself more time and take a big cut at the ball. One of the Stan's main improvements is he's found a happy medium to where while he doesn't exactly hug the baseline, he's moved in a few steps on average but still standing far back enough to line up his shots.

In modern tennis, Roger is an aberration among one handed backhand players in terms of taking the ball so early.

 

[brokenshoelace]

^Stan has the build for that sort of consistent power game though. So is Berdman

Yeah but I think you'll find a common theme among power players and that's inconsistency. Against elite athletes who can defend, transition, and outmaneuver you, you need too much perfection to consistently hit through them without beating yourself. That's why we see it happening in on occasions, in big matches even, but see these lopsided head to heads in favor of the big 4.

I still think Novak is the prototype. For all the talk about power, Novak is able to generate serious power off of both wings. He just doesn't feel the need to do it routinely and uses his athleticism, point construction, etc... to win tennis matches. He pretty much combines the best of both worlds.

I don't think we'll be seeing a tour full of Safins 2.0, not on today's surfaces.

 

[Federberg]

^I agree with what you're saying Broken, but this thread was opened as a follow on for the thread that was discussing what next style would be dominant. Yes Novak is the prototype for now, but what is the prototype for the future dominant style going to be?

That was why I put forward Stan as a possible prototype for the future dominant style. You make a good point about consistency, but yesterday we saw Stan hit with consistent power and aggression. Extremely difficult to do, but like Safin beforehand it's clearly possible on any given Sunday, perhaps Stan will maintain this level now in the future time will tell. But I haven't seen any other style that can knock Novak back like that. Have you?

 

[DarthFed]

^Stan has the build for that sort of consistent power game though. So is Berdman

Yeah but I think you'll find a common theme among power players and that's inconsistency. Against elite athletes who can defend, transition, and outmaneuver you, you need too much perfection to consistently hit through them without beating yourself. That's why we see it happening in on occasions, in big matches even, but see these lopsided head to heads in favor of the big 4.

I still think Novak is the prototype. For all the talk about power, Novak is able to generate serious power off of both wings. He just doesn't feel the need to do it routinely and uses his athleticism, point construction, etc... to win tennis matches. He pretty much combines the best of both worlds.

I don't think we'll be seeing a tour full of Safins 2.0, not on today's surfaces.

So what do you think is the next dominant style of play or do you think the game will always be ruled by players in the mold of the top 3 going forward?

With the expectation that evolution still exists and the racquet technology will continue to improve I think eventually we will get to the spot where it becomes more about power. Of course who knows how long it will take and who knows if there will be further changes in surfaces that affects what style will dominate.

 

[brokenshoelace]

^Stan has the build for that sort of consistent power game though. So is Berdman

Yeah but I think you'll find a common theme among power players and that's inconsistency. Against elite athletes who can defend, transition, and outmaneuver you, you need too much perfection to consistently hit through them without beating yourself. That's why we see it happening in on occasions, in big matches even, but see these lopsided head to heads in favor of the big 4.

I still think Novak is the prototype. For all the talk about power, Novak is able to generate serious power off of both wings. He just doesn't feel the need to do it routinely and uses his athleticism, point construction, etc... to win tennis matches. He pretty much combines the best of both worlds.

I don't think we'll be seeing a tour full of Safins 2.0, not on today's surfaces.

So what do you think is the next dominant style of play or do you think the game will always be ruled by players in the mold of the top 3 going forward?

With the expectation that evolution still exists and the racquet technology will continue to improve I think eventually we will get to the spot where it becomes more about power. Of course who knows how long it will take and who knows if there will be further changes in surfaces that affects what style will dominate.

I think as long as the surfaces and balls continue to play the way they are, the dominant players will be great movers with a consistent baseline game who are great at both offense and defense, not unlike what we're seeing now. That doesn't mean we can't see a Djokovic 2.0, or someone similar to Murray but more aggressive, but I don't think we'll be seeing a significant shift.

 

[Carol]

Nadal has the ability to play the BH with both hands and also with one hand which sometimes tha ball goes even more long

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nadal has the ability to play the BH with both hands and also with one hand which sometimes tha ball goes even more long

The one handed backhand he plays is a sliced backhand, something every other two handed backhand player does as well.

 

[Carol]

Nadal has the ability to play the BH with both hands and also with one hand which sometimes tha ball goes even more long

The one handed backhand he plays is a sliced backhand, something every other two handed backhand player does as well.

Agree, but my point was that he does pretty well and he should do it more often. He is right hand but he plays with the left, he can play the BH with both hands, he could play just with one too
Also many times I'm thinking if he would serve with his right hand maybe would be more powerful and effective? who knows :huh:

 

[Front242]

Serena Williams is right handed and hit a left handed forehand in the women's final Screamapova has done it once or twice too.

 

[Front242]

Nadal has the ability to play the BH with both hands and also with one hand which sometimes tha ball goes even more long

The one handed backhand he plays is a sliced backhand, something every other two handed backhand player does as well.

Agree, but my point was that he does pretty well and he should do it more often. He is right hand but he plays with the left, he can play the BH with both hands, he could play just with one too
Also many times I'm thinking if he would serve with his right hand maybe would be more powerful and effective? who knows :huh:

He'd lose his lefty advantage with the wide serve imo by doing that. Plus the fact that he's served for years left handed it'd be very hard to serve right handed. Finally, and most importantly, it'd be impossible when you think about it to serve right handed and then quickly switch hands to place his racquet back in his left hand. The speed some returns get back that's physically impossible against the top players. Guys like Novak have the ball back at your feet barely after you've finished your service motion.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Actually, the OP may be on to something here. While this prototype may not be the best way to achieve success, this prototype seems to be the only way to achieve success in the era of Big Four by thwarting them.

Let us look at recent successes of Non-Big Four players and more importantly how they achieved it.

1. Stan: AO 14, MC 14, RG 15. In all cases he basically overpowered the opponent.

2. Cilic: USO 15, Essentially played lights out tennis to eliminate Roger (and others).

3. Tsonga: Toronto 14, He basically blew the field including Novak and Roger by big hitting.

In all cases, there was not much of finesse or head games involved. It is just raw power, redlining and lights out tennis. Seems to be the only way to succeed against the Big-4.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Actually, the OP may be on to something here. While this prototype may not be the best way to achieve success, this prototype seems to be the only way to achieve success in the era of Big Four by thwarting them.

Let us look at recent successes of Non-Big Four players and more importantly how they achieved it.

1. Stan: AO 14, MC 14, RG 15. In all cases he basically overpowered the opponent.

2. Cilic: USO 15, Essentially played lights out tennis to eliminate Roger (and others).

3. Tsonga: Toronto 14, He basically blew the field including Novak and Roger by big hitting.

In all cases, there was not much of finesse or head games involved. It is just raw power, redlining and lights out tennis. Seems to be the only way to succeed against the Big-4.

Thing is, this requires way too much perfection. That's sort of why I can't see it as a blueprint. Yes, in theory, if you redline your game, hit huge off of both wings, paint the lines, hit winners from ludicrous positions, serve like a giant, while keeping errors to a minimum, you're going to win.

Now the one player who in theory, could have made me a believer if he had kept it up would be Del Potro, because he doesn't necessarily clobber the ball on each shot or always feel the need to go for low margin shots, but he had great point construction, a phenomenal rally forehand, arguably the top running forehand in the game, and a the ability to completely crush the ball when need be. Obviously it didn't work out due to injures but I can see someone similar making a lot of noise. I don't see a tour where we have multiple Del Potros though.

In fairness to Stan, he's hardly a mindless ball-basher, and his cross court backhand is ludicrously consistent considering the way he hits it. His rally cross court backhand might legitimately be the best in the game after Djokovic.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

Actually, the OP may be on to something here. While this prototype may not be the best way to achieve success, this prototype seems to be the only way to achieve success in the era of Big Four by thwarting them.

Let us look at recent successes of Non-Big Four players and more importantly how they achieved it.

1. Stan: AO 14, MC 14, RG 15. In all cases he basically overpowered the opponent.

2. Cilic: USO 15, Essentially played lights out tennis to eliminate Roger (and others).

3. Tsonga: Toronto 14, He basically blew the field including Novak and Roger by big hitting.

In all cases, there was not much of finesse or head games involved. It is just raw power, redlining and lights out tennis. Seems to be the only way to succeed against the Big-4.

Thing is, this requires way too much perfection. That's sort of why I can't see it as a blueprint. Yes, in theory, if you redline your game, hit huge off of both wings, paint the lines, hit winners from ludicrous positions, serve like a giant, while keeping errors to a minimum, you're going to win.

well, i think then the question is what people are aiming for. Big Hitting definitely is not the way to sustained excellence a la Novak/Rafa/Roger. but who can really do that? winning a slam, or even two, on the other hand? it seems that the best chance is to hit Big (albeit with more spin than the bashers of old) and hope to be able to string it together for a full two weeks. so this might be A valid blueprint for a tier that we just didn't have for a while, the average Slam winner.