I always choose to receive , because : then i can serve after the sidechanges , so before serve i always have 1 minute to rest , and then when the opponent serves , he becomes a bit more tired , and i can try to break him. serve needs more energy than receiving.
yes it's also a good argument
Especially Tsonga should always choose to receive against Nadal, since his problem against him is that he gets so angry after Nadal's serves (time to serve + difficulty to break him) that he dashes off his serve
I have the impression from my late memories that Youzhny also prefers serving after sidechange for the same reason.
Originally Posted by HKZ
I know in Federer's case, since 2008 or so, he has had trouble finding that rhythm off his first serve and forehand early on in matches. It isn't like pre-2008 Federer where he would get a good two aces or so in the first game. It has increasingly become dangerous for him to serve first than prior years. I mean these days it appears he can barely get his first serve in the first game and his forehand goes absolutely wild. But then again, I don't think he is really there 100% mentally in non-Slam events regardless..
yes traditionnally Federer preferred serving first, I think because he can put pressure on the opponent's serve and mind when he serves to stay in the set. Also because he used to be a very good starter.
But now he becomes old, and old players are rustier
.He's more and more often broken in first game because of what you say. Maybe more outside of slams, but it also happens in slams, for instance against Davydenko in Melbourne, he saved his serve at the extreme limit in first game, whereas he had given him his serve when serving first in Doha.
Berdych also has problems to start, and has been fragile in many of the starts I saw from him recently.