|
|
Post by jhar26 on May 14, 2008 13:07:03 GMT -5
As a tennis fan AND a Belgian I can't let this day go by without paying a little tribute to our national heroine Justine Henin.... 1 Australian Open title, 4 French Open titles, 2 US Open titles, 1 Olympic Gold, 2 Masters titles (YEC's), 1 Fed Cup title, the number 1 ranked player in the world. A frail girl reaching the top thanks to a fanatical work ethic, great strenght of spirit and truly exceptional technical skills. Thank you Justine for all the terrific matches and all the sleep I lost over the years on many an occassion watching you play in the early hours of the morning on the other side of the world. I never regretted it for a minute because your tennis was truly a joy to watch.  Gaston |
|
|
|
Post by arjan on May 14, 2008 14:42:41 GMT -5
It was a surprise to me she stops... what could be the reason? Physical discomfort, or tired of the competitive world? Seems like players stop younger every time. Wonder if that can be explained somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by jhar26 on May 14, 2008 15:23:44 GMT -5
It was a surprise to me she stops... what could be the reason? Physical discomfort, or tired of the competitive world? Seems like players stop younger every time. Wonder if that can be explained somehow. I think it has to do with tennis racket technology which continues to make the game faster and faster - and thus physically more demanding for each new generation. The material with which rackets are made is different, they are lighter and they are much larger - which means harder shots are possible because of the much bigger trampoline effect. The sweet spot (the centre and ideal hitting zone) of a modern racket is as big as the entire wooden racket with which Chris Evert and Billie Jean King used to play in the 1970's. This has resulted in the fact that todays players need to be - and thus have to work much harder - to be physically top-fit and strong to be able to create and handle the pace necessary to be successful in todays game. In terms of conditioning this means that todays players are superior creatures compared to those from the past. But in terms of shotmaking ability the oldies were (on average of course) no doubt much better. In fact, compared to many of the past champions many of today are strong and fast - but clumsy. If you don't believe me hit out on some shots with a modern racket for 30 minutes or so - then try to do the same thing with a wooden racket. Shots that were winners with a modern racket will end up over the fence or at the bottom of the net with a wooden racket. Modern rackets leave a lot of room for error, technically speaking - wooden rackets leave no room for error whatsoever. Anyway - careers today are shorter and injuries much more frequent because the game is faster and more based on power than technique. And the increased number of hardcourt tournaments (risk of injuries is much higher on a hardcourt than on clay or grass) doesn't help any either. Gaston |
|
|
|
Post by egoodstein on May 14, 2008 16:28:49 GMT -5
I was kinda surprised by Justine-- very sad to see her go, as she was one of the most creative
players in today's game. Maybe she just lost that 'need' to compete or something, as well
as all the physical toll that tennis now takes on everyone-- & women seem more prone to for whatever reason. It's kinda sad that even though some great players now, it's whoever is healthiest-- last woman standing-- who seems to win or have edge anyway. Does
in a way make the upcoming French open more intriguing in womens' section. It'll never happen, & I wouldn't know how to implement, but I kinda wish more time off for players were required or something. Men too. Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by arjan on May 15, 2008 3:35:49 GMT -5
The opposite is happening, players are required to play more and more. Though some complaints are made about that but that's mainly in the orientation-phase how to change that.
I don't agree completely with the remarks about power over skills, I think still more innovative players beat power players any time. I do agree about the clumsyness though, who's that girl who just can't seem to do a good serve but still is in the top 10?
|
|
|
|
Post by jhar26 on May 15, 2008 11:27:56 GMT -5
I was kinda surprised by Justine-- very sad to see her go, as she was one of the most creative players in today's game. Maybe she just lost that 'need' to compete or something, as well as all the physical toll that tennis now takes on everyone-- & women seem more prone to for whatever reason. It's kinda sad that even though some great players now, it's whoever is healthiest-- last woman standing-- who seems to win or have edge anyway. Does in a way make the upcoming French open more intriguing in womens' section. It'll never happen, & I wouldn't know how to implement, but I kinda wish more time off for players were required or something. Men too. Ed I definitely agree that Justine was one of the most creative players out there....amazing skills. Only Martina Hingis compares to her in terms of natural talent IMO. But the difference is that Justine had a better work ethic - she trained much harder, worked with weights, etc.. I agree that the break between seasons should be much longer. Play the season closing Masters (YEC) in, say, October and move the Australian Open to the end of Februari preceeded by a few smaller tournaments to prepare for the first slam. Also, there are only two weeks between the French and Wimbledon - which is absurd. There's not enough time to prepare for the grass after the claycourt season. Hold the French one week earlier and Wimbedon one week later and they have a month, which would be much better. Gaston |
|
|
|
Post by jhar26 on May 15, 2008 11:56:08 GMT -5
I don't agree completely with the remarks about power over skills, I think still more innovative players beat power players any time. I do agree about the clumsyness though, who's that girl who just can't seem to do a good serve but still is in the top 10? Well, I have to exaggerate a bit to make my point - obviously you can't be a top player without having skills.. But since the introduction of graphite rackets in the early 1980's the evolution towards an ever more powerful game is undeniable and this is to the advantage of players with a certain physique. Just compare the average height and body weight of todays players with those of the wooden racket era. A great player is a great player, and they would all have a certain amount of success no matter what, but having said that.....someone like, say, Sharapova wouldn't have been nearly as successful playing with wood IMO whereas Hingis would probably have won twice as much. That's not to make light of Maria's achievements - she's a great champion, but the evolution of racket technology has had such an impact on the game that it's only logical that some players are/would have been better or worse with wood, graphite or the modern rackets of today. Sorta like players are better on clay, grass or hardcourt - but the impact of the rackets is even bigger than that of the surface IMO. I think you're talking about Dementieva. I bet that she on average wins more return games than service games.  A pity really, her groundstrokes are very good. Even with only an average serve she probably would have won a slam by now. Gaston |
|
|
|
Post by egoodstein on May 15, 2008 18:09:10 GMT -5
I think players can improve in areas too. Sharapova overall is moving better now &
working hard obviously-- though I wonder bout her health really (& 'distractions' of glamor); Dementieva I saw recently someplace & was surprised to see much improved serving (if still too erratic). Kuznetkova has seemed to improve in a lotta areas if still volatile/unpredictable. Even
Graf changed up her game as time went on so anything possible.
Those are good suggestions for the schedule-- esp. French/Wimbledon 'gap' which currently
is beyond ridiculous. I also think the Masters finales should be moved up as you say. Problem is the players themselves often overplay-- stars for appearance fees or whatever, & others scrambling at minor tournements to get by. I don't know that they'll ever agree to have a 'union' that's independent to resolve some of this. But maybe the Williams sisters have something not playing very much-- so they stay interested when they do. Ed
|
|
A pity really, her groundstrokes are very good. Even with only an average serve she probably would have won a slam by now.