Pat Cash - Nadal & Djokovic are boring

[Moxie]

Its worth refreshing our memory with some of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPsu-zL2Ah0

(Sampras v. Becker, 1996)

Now compare it to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdjNghcCNPU

(Nadal v. Djokovic, 2013)

Which do you prefer and why? To me they are just two different styles of tennis. The first is like two samurais which each point usually being two or three quick shots and then, bam, done. The second is more of a boxing match, with two heavy-weights going at each other in an endurance test.

Here's one more to look at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYr9ZCmeLP0

(Laver v. Borg, 1976)

I must say, there's a beauty in this slower, more stately style that I can't help but feel nostalgic for. With today's modern rackets it would be impossible to ever re-capture this, but its hard not to admire the grace of this lost style of tennis which, in many ways, combined the best elements of both of the above styles.

Dude, these were very interesting examples of the different styles across the eras, (though I do agree with Kieran that it was a little unfair to pick the 54-shot rally one for Nadal v. Djokovic. It was the longest rally of that match. But the crowd appreciated it.)

A couple of things stood out:

1.) You play against your opponent. Sampras and Becker were both playing very aggressive tennis, and they had to play each other that way. I also found it to be "gutsy" tennis: little time to think, just be in the right spot in the court and trust your reactions. Very cat/mouse. Thrilling in its way, though not my favorite.

2.) Borg v. Laver was the old guard meeting the new. Borg had to come to net faster because Laver would. (See pt. 1 above.) But Laver was getting passed. I don't know if anyone else noted the rather snide remark from the commentator: "Borg is a very good clay court player." (It was a HC match.) And his fellow commentator sniggered. In his day on clay, Borg would stay at the baseline forever. I remember matches with Vilas where points also ran to a high shot count. I always have found that exciting. But to point it out: that's not new.

3.) And so now, and with the new technology, that you can hold the ball longer on the strings, going to the net is more perilous. Your risk of getting passed is even higher. Players now have to pick their moments more carefully, if they're not controlling the opponent.

 

[Moxie]

The talk about "variety" seems only to apply to baseliners. Yet serve and volley players who couldn't cut it from the baseline where somehow playing with "variety." I don't get the double standards.

Of course it would be nice to see players with much variety in their games, like Fed and Haas. But players having little variety in their own games isn't the biggest problem but that there is so little variety in all players' playing styles. It would be nice if there were players with different playing styles on the top of the game.

Trying to watch the Aussie Open from last season with Nole and Rafa was tragic! It was the ugliest thing in tennis that I've ever seen! Nole plays like that to blunt Rafa's game, but it's still some of the most horrible looking tennis to be played in the open era! Taking almost 6 hours to win just was interminable! It drags me down even when I cut out all the toweling off, challenges, and other stall tactics used to drag out this marathon! I don't blame Nole as much since it only seems to happen when playing Rafa who has some of the ugliest stroke production in the game; esp. the backhand where he bends at the waist! There's just nothing I could ever learn watching him play even if I were a beginner except maybe to annoy and irritate an opponent! If he passes Roger in majors, I'll still have to seriously rank him below due to the majority of his titles on clay; talk about one trick pony! Only 5 majors off clay will never be impressive to me! That's why Borg is so highly regarded going from FO to Wimbledon to win them both 3 straight years and making the final for a fourth try! "Do that and call me for another review Rafa!" :nono :huh:

I will never understand the notion that some shot-making, no matter how effective, is just too "ugly" for some people.

No, you can't do what Rafa and Nole do, because they are far superior athletes. But you kid yourself if you think you can do what Roger does. Some of his shots may be more recognizable as shots that you play, but surely yours are very pale versions. Just because you can't learn anything from Rafa and Nole doesn't mean that really talented youngsters can't.

 

[zalvar]

The talk about "variety" seems only to apply to baseliners. Yet serve and volley players who couldn't cut it from the baseline where somehow playing with "variety." I don't get the double standards.

Of course it would be nice to see players with much variety in their games, like Fed and Haas. But players having little variety in their own games isn't the biggest problem but that there is so little variety in all players' playing styles. It would be nice if there were players with different playing styles on the top of the game.

Trying to watch the Aussie Open from last season with Nole and Rafa was tragic! It was the ugliest thing in tennis that I've ever seen! Nole plays like that to blunt Rafa's game, but it's still some of the most horrible looking tennis to be played in the open era! Taking almost 6 hours to win just was interminable! It drags me down even when I cut out all the toweling off, challenges, and other stall tactics used to drag out this marathon! I don't blame Nole as much since it only seems to happen when playing Rafa who has some of the ugliest stroke production in the game; esp. the backhand where he bends at the waist! There's just nothing I could ever learn watching him play even if I were a beginner except maybe to annoy and irritate an opponent! If he passes Roger in majors, I'll still have to seriously rank him below due to the majority of his titles on clay; talk about one trick pony! Only 5 majors off clay will never be impressive to me! That's why Borg is so highly regarded going from FO to Wimbledon to win them both 3 straight years and making the final for a fourth try! "Do that and call me for another review Rafa!" :nono :huh:

oh my god. Bending at the waist? SO tragic ... so de classe ... o__O

And P.S. Roger has ONLY 1 clay court Grand Slam. ONE. Just one. Only one.

Rafa has 15 Hard Court titles out of 60 and Roger has 10 Clay Court Titles out of 77.
Rafa has been a finalist in 14 HC Tournaments and Roger Finalist in 13 Clay Court tourments.

I guess he's a Hard Court Specialist.