New Generation of Tennis: Plain trash. [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

New Generation of Tennis: Plain trash.

prima donna
11-09-2005, 02:28 PM
I'm sitting here thinking and it just randomly pops up in my head what this game has changed from, instead of making progress, it's almost like things are going backwards. The classic game of tennis that once was made so popular by the likes of Bill Tilden, Rod Laver and John McEnroe have gone out of the window. How many old school style players are there anymore ?

So much for guys like Edberg, I respect Borg (2nd best of all-time) and all, but he is partially to blame for this, he played hockey much of his life and thus his mechanics were very unusual, quite unique, extreme western grip he used ... there's no more classic serve & volley game or flat strokes accompanied by continental grips that once made the game so exciting. I can understand why, most tournaments were played on grass and thus players conformed to what style of play would be a success on that particular surface.

Sampras was somewhat old school, even his racquet was a modernized rip-off of the Jack Kramer. Federer is very old school, which is exactly why he dominates. The game is becoming ugly, with all of these extreme grips and the usage of heavy spin, you have many freak victories, because they play such an unusual game that it's difficult to pick up on the 1st or 2nd time you meet them. I won't say any names, but this new generation of tennis is sort of becoming a combination of ball-bashing and moonball tennis, not to mention with the steroid era, certain french open players that were runner-up to Nadal will make unusually speedy progress ... quite mysterious huh :retard:

As if this weren't enough, sportsmanship is at an all-time low. It's hard enough to like a guy that's blasting 150mph serves and a ground game a journeyman ranked 125 in the world would even get a chuckle at. I'm sometimes feeling like a hypocrite, because I actually like Karlovic and despise Roddick, but I think Roddick's game accompanied by his attitude is what makes me so sick. Karlovic is just trying to earn a living, Roddick is masquerading around as an actual tennis player until a guy like Fedex or Hewitt puts him in his place.

I guess that I'll have to accept this new brand of tennis, so I reluctantly embrace the likes of Gasquet & Berdych, atleast they have a classy demeanor and some finesse to their tennis game.

marifline
11-09-2005, 02:31 PM
I guess that I'll have to accept this new brand of tennis, so I embrace the likes of Gasquet & Berdych, atleast they have a classy demeanor and finesse to their tennis game.

and Santoro ;)

tennischick
11-09-2005, 02:36 PM
I'm sitting here thinking and it just randomly pops up in my head what this game has changed from, instead of making progress, it's almost like things are going backwards. The classic game of tennis that once was made so popular by the likes of Bill Tilden, Rod Laver and John McEnroe have gone out of the window. How many old school style players are there anymore ?

So much for guys like Edberg, I respect Borg (2nd best of all-time) and all, but he is partially to blame for this, he played hockey much of his life and thus his mechanics were very unusual, quite unique, extreme western grip he used ... there's no more classic serve & volley game or flat strokes accompanied by continental grips that once made the game so exciting. I can understand why, most tournaments were played on grass and thus players conformed to what style of play would be a success on that particular surface.

Sampras was somewhat old school, even his racquet was a modernized rip-off of the Jack Kramer. Federer is very old school, which is exactly why he dominates. The game is becoming ugly, with all of these extreme grips and the usage of heavy spin, you have many freak victories, because they play such an unusual game that it's difficult to pick up on the 1st or 2nd time you meet them. I won't say any names, but this new generation of tennis is sort of becoming a combination of ball-bashing and moonball tennis, not to mention with the steroid era, certain french open players that were runner-up to Nadal will make unusually speedy progress ... quite mysterious huh :retard:

As if this weren't enough, sportsmanship is at an all-time low. It's hard enough to like a guy that's blasting 150mph serves and a ground game a journeyman ranked 125 in the world would even get a chuckle at. I'm sometimes feeling like a hypocrite, because I actually like Karlovic and despise Roddick, but I think Roddick's game accompanied by his attitude is what makes me so sick. Karlovic is just trying to earn a living, Roddick is masquerading around as an actual tennis player until a guy like Fedex or Hewitt puts him in his place.

I guess that I'll have to accept this new brand of tennis, so I reluctantly embrace the likes of Gasquet & Berdych, atleast they have a classy demeanor and some finesse to their tennis game.
my coach said a number of similar things last night. he said that when he went to the tourny in Houston, he was shocked by how poorly Rodiick and others were volleying. i asked him what he thought caused the change from say players like Edberg (whom he also mentioned) to now. and his theory is that the players from that era did not put as much body contortion into the serve, such that they could move immediately into the court to set up the volley. and the new style of serving contorts the body so much (in order to produce more power) that the play is untill unwinding out of it by the time the ball is coming back so they can't get into the court to volley. i thought it was an interesting perspective.

Action Jackson
11-09-2005, 02:37 PM
I guess that I'll have to accept this new brand of tennis, so I reluctantly embrace the likes of Gasquet & Berdych, atleast they have a classy demeanor and some finesse to their tennis game.

Times change and if it bothers you that much, then don't watch tennis, it goes in cycles and Borg isn't to blame at all, it doesn't even go that far back, one players got more professional then the game changed, that has happened in a lot of sports and tennis is no exception, things move forward, sometimes for the better and other times not.

case
11-09-2005, 03:07 PM
Don't you ever make a comment without insulting someone? Telling MyskinaLova to stop watching the game is rude and not the point. It is valid argument and many others have made similar arguments. The players from the past weren't professionals? Which ones? Ashe? Laver? I don't understand your use of the term professional. What, they weren't good enough to be called professional or they played for free? You said they became professional after Bjorg? He did change the game, but professional tennis was around before Bjorg.

Your comment, of one sentence, really does not address her statements. The game has turned ugly. Tennis was once a sport with some respect to tradition and for others. It is hard to see that respect from the players (like the recent comments from Berdych) and its fans (like some who post here).

I thought it would be fun to talk about tennis here, but it's not. Tennis is a job and a profession for the ATP players, but it is entertainment and a game for the rest of us. You (and others) treat it with a viciousness that is hard to explain. You also personally demean those that don't agree with you. I can only say you need a life.

mandoura
11-09-2005, 03:12 PM
Times change and if it bothers you that much, then don't watch tennis, it goes in cycles and Borg isn't to blame at all, it doesn't even go that far back, one players got more professional then the game changed, that has happened in a lot of sports and tennis is no exception, things move forward, sometimes for the better and other times not.

Isn't that too extreme? Doesn't everybody have the right to comment, even negatively, on his/her favorite game? This is just his/her opinion. We don't have to agree but we don't have to cast him/her out or shut him/her out either. :)

Other than that, I agree with your post, specially the last clause.

Billy Moonshine
11-09-2005, 03:14 PM
Don't you ever make a comment without insulting someone? Telling MyskinaLova to stop watching the game is rude and not the point. It is valid argument and many others have made similar arguments. The players from the past weren't professionals? Which ones? Ashe? Laver? I don't understand your use of the term professional. What, they weren't good enough to be called professional or they played for free? You said they became professional after Bjorg? He did change the game, but professional tennis was around before Bjorg.

Your comment, of one sentence, really does not address her statements. The game has turned ugly. Tennis was once a sport with some respect to tradition and for others. It is hard to see that respect from the players (like the recent comments from Berdych) and its fans (like some who post here).

I thought it would be fun to talk about tennis here, but it's not. Tennis is a job and a profession for the ATP players, but it is entertainment and a game for the rest of us. You (and others) treat it with a viciousness that is hard to explain. You also personally demean those that don't agree with you. I can only say you need a life.

:worship:

uNIVERSE mAN
11-09-2005, 03:16 PM
George Hitler is always judgemental, as though his word is equivalent to the gospel truth.

mandoura
11-09-2005, 03:16 PM
TChick, yes, pretty interesting perspective.

prima donna
11-09-2005, 04:13 PM
Times change and if it bothers you that much, then don't watch tennis, it goes in cycles and Borg isn't to blame at all, it doesn't even go that far back, one players got more professional then the game changed, that has happened in a lot of sports and tennis is no exception, things move forward, sometimes for the better and other times not.
If I didn't watch tennis now, I'd miss out on the rare likes of Roger Federer, Fabrice Santoro or any of the other top players that possess a hint of finesse. Borg changed a lot of conventional thought, because he was the first player with this particular style to have success on every surface, thus explaining why I say that he is to blame. Name another player with his style of play that had such large amounts of success. Things move forward, obviously, I don't even know if such a cliche statement is worth acknowledging; however, do not mistake change for improvement or progression, my friend.

kensan
11-09-2005, 05:08 PM
The game is becoming ugly, with all of these extreme grips and the usage of heavy spin, you have many freak victories, because they play such an unusual game that it's difficult to pick up on the 1st or 2nd time you meet them. I won't say any names, but this new generation of tennis is sort of becoming a combination of ball-bashing and moonball tennis

I am 5'6" and played junior and college ball, and hit with extreme loopy topspin. I got plenty of flack for it: Play a real man's game! Welcome to girls 12 and under! etc. My response was always, well what game do you expect me to play against 5'11" and taller guys? Power tennis? Serve and volley? Do you think Agassi and Sampras would be as successful if they were 5" shorter?

Okay aside from the "smaller players";-) I know Nadal is tall enough to play a classic game of tennis. That being said, hey maybe he gets off on hitting the equivalent of kick serves with each stroke instead of the heater. I know as a now recreational player I appreciate seing a huge kick serve a lot, even moreso than a 100mph fastball. Different strokes for different folks, live and let play I say.

Castafiore
11-09-2005, 05:19 PM
Different strokes for different folks, live and let play I say.
:yeah:


The world would be a boring place if everybody had exactly the same idea on beauty, excitement, fun, ugliness,...
In my opinion, you can either embrace those differences or else focus on your own viewpoint and shout "trash" at somebody who does not find beauty in exactly the same places as you do.

Domino
11-09-2005, 06:21 PM
The game is transitioning. Your getting lots of bolters in the new styles, and people are adjusting. Eventually, it evens out. The game has been in transition for the past five or so years, and we're seeing emerging players who have varying styles of enjoyable tennis emerge who have adjusted to the new pars set by other players. Players are learning to be more patient (Gonzalez recently, and some other shot-makers), getting used to the pace of the ball (Roddick's serve is not bailing him out like it used to for a very good reason), and eventually more players will learn to keep their concentration high enough to beat moonballing speedsters by patiently constructing long points and eventually finishing off at the midcourt and the net. This year I have seen more netplay from top players than before due to a lot of speedsters comming up. Give it another year or so.

celia
11-09-2005, 07:19 PM
George Hitler is always judgemental, as though his word is equivalent to the gospel truth.
:lol: he does write as if everything he has to say is fact. however, this is an open forum and he is entitled to write however he wants.

uNIVERSE mAN
11-09-2005, 10:38 PM
if that's so, how come he's always putting me down then?

dkw
11-09-2005, 11:02 PM
I'm sitting here thinking and it just randomly pops up in my head what this game has changed from, instead of making progress, it's almost like things are going backwards.
Maybe you should just stop sitting or stop thinking... Either way I would no longer be privy to your tireless rants that are so clearly subterfuge for promoting the players you like (Roger) and insulting the players you hate (Nadal, Andy) :angel:

prima donna
11-09-2005, 11:09 PM
Maybe you should just stop sitting or stop thinking... Either way I would no longer be privy to your tireless rants that are so clearly subterfuge for promoting the players you like (Roger) and insulting the players you hate (Nadal, Andy) :angel:
Don't you think the mentality that you're subscribing to is a tad elementary ? It's a pity that your mind isn't able to stretch past the fact that it's not an issue of "hate" or dislike (unless it relates to their particular games) that I find perturbing. I'm not the first and certainly not the last to file such a complaint, actually, there are probably tons of threads like this if you do a search.

A few suggestions:
1). Don't read stuff that you don't like, I'm especially perplexed and curious as to what it says for your intellect if you're reading word for word something you consider "ranting" --- sounds slightly moronic to me.

Most of the time when I post here, there's a sincere desire to make sense and spell things out politely, but since that's been unsuccessful: Stop your bitching and move on.

Sjengster
11-09-2005, 11:10 PM
if that's so, how come he's always putting me down then?

Because you seemingly always deserve it. But hey, it's not like he's physically stopping you from posting whatever nonsense you can come up with next.

revolution
11-09-2005, 11:15 PM
Because you seemingly always deserve it. But hey, it's not like he's physically stopping you from posting whatever nonsense you can come up with next.

Well not in this case, but others have been harshly treated and singled out, not by GWH, but by little groups who hang together. God this place is becoming like schools.. mosher club.. chav club.. skaters...

Sjengster
11-09-2005, 11:16 PM
Don't you ever make a comment without insulting someone? Telling MyskinaLova to stop watching the game is rude and not the point. It is valid argument and many others have made similar arguments. The players from the past weren't professionals? Which ones? Ashe? Laver? I don't understand your use of the term professional. What, they weren't good enough to be called professional or they played for free? You said they became professional after Bjorg? He did change the game, but professional tennis was around before Bjorg.

I've barely seen a post of myskinaLova's that doesn't insult someone, so he is in good company there. What George means by becoming more professional is that players started to become fitter and stronger by following in the footsteps of Lendl in the 1980s, producing the new brand of hard-hitting power tennis that obviously came after Borg.

Your comment, of one sentence, really does not address her statements. The game has turned ugly. Tennis was once a sport with some respect to tradition and for others. It is hard to see that respect from the players (like the recent comments from Berdych) and its fans (like some who post here).

You're moaning about fans having no respect for the game? This, from someone who has suggested that Federer faked his ankle injury and gives Ginepri no credit whatsoever for becoming a Top 20 player? :lol: Please, headcase, keep the hypocrisy coming.

Sjengster
11-09-2005, 11:17 PM
Well not in this case, but others have been harshly treated and singled out, not by GWH, but by little groups who hang together. God this place is becoming like schools.. mosher club.. chav club.. skaters...

The fate of all popular internet communities, sadly. You should dig up my thread in non-tennis likening MTF to France in the Wars of Religion - I almost think it was prophetic.

prima donna
11-09-2005, 11:18 PM
God this place is becoming like schools.. mosher club.. chav club.. skaters...
:hatoff:

Phunkadelicious
11-09-2005, 11:18 PM
Well not in this case, but others have been harshly treated and singled out, not by GWH, but by little groups who hang together. God this place is becoming like schools.. mosher club.. chav club.. skaters...

oooh ooooh can I hang out with the skaters?

NYCtennisfan
11-09-2005, 11:30 PM
Interesting thoughts brought up by TChick's coach. When I first started playing, an aggressive player learned how to volley because that was the only way you could end points quickly with a wooden racquet other than with the serve. You could not blast winners from the baseline. This made us work on the volley and lots of other strokes that would help us get to net.

When young players start out now, they learn to play aggressively from the baseline and simply neglect the volley because with the new racquet technology, one has to be a very good volleyer to have a lot of success at net. In the old days, you could put someone on the defensive, get them behind the baseline and have them come up with some amazing angle to pass you. There was no way to put as much velocity on the ball or spin or anything like what we have today so a a good volleyer almost always had the advantage. Now there are players who can pass you from 10 feet behind the baseline and on the run from both wings. Young players these days learn that coming to net is risky and the percentages will not wind up working in your favor over time unelss you are a good volleyer.

JMAC often talks about how his mentality never really changed. He KNEW he was going to get passed but he was going to win most of the exchanges. I don't know how many players believe that they are going to win most of the exchanges with them at the net. Most players only believe that the %'s are int heir favor coming in off of a really FH or BH and will not even dream of slicing the ball and coming in.

IF you can end points fromt he baseline and feel very confident in the %'s being in your favor from back there, you will tend not to use the other strokes. That's what we have today. IN most matches, you will have two palyers exchanging almost identical strokes from the baseline until some gets the upper hand. In truth, it probably IS the % play right now.

prima donna
11-09-2005, 11:44 PM
Interesting thoughts brought up by TChick's coach. When I first started playing, an aggressive player learned how to volley because that was the only way you could end points quickly with a wooden racquet other than with the serve. You could not blast winners from the baseline. This made us work on the volley and lots of other strokes that would help us get to net.

When young players start out now, they learn to play aggressively from the baseline and simply neglect the volley because with the new racquet technology, one has to be a very good volleyer to have a lot of success at net. In the old days, you could put someone on the defensive, get them behind the baseline and have them come up with some amazing angle to pass you. There was no way to put as much velocity on the ball or spin or anything like what we have today so a a good volleyer almost always had the advantage. Now there are players who can pass you from 10 feet behind the baseline and on the run from both wings. Young players these days learn that coming to net is risky and the percentages will not wind up working in your favor over time unelss you are a good volleyer.

JMAC often talks about how his mentality never really changed. He KNEW he was going to get passed but he was going to win most of the exchanges. I don't know how many players believe that they are going to win most of the exchanges with them at the net. Most players only believe that the %'s are int heir favor coming in off of a really FH or BH and will not even dream of slicing the ball and coming in.

IF you can end points fromt he baseline and feel very confident in the %'s being in your favor from back there, you will tend not to use the other strokes. That's what we have today. IN most matches, you will have two palyers exchanging almost identical strokes from the baseline until some gets the upper hand. In truth, it probably IS the % play right now.

Keen insight from NYC, as usual. I enjoyed the post and can second the fact that players are quite reluctant to come in behind slices. Most of the shots players are coming in on aren't really what I'd consider "approach shots" but shots so powerfully hit or angled that all that can be done is having it blocked back to them or some other sort of weak reply, ensuring a relatively easy put-away.

I can't really blame them, but really fundamentals have gone down and due to there being such a tremendous amount of baseline players, no one really faces old school serve & volleying. Remember, Henman made it to the SF (I think?) of 2004 French Open and so what's that say for the state of tennis right now ? These guys do not know their business when it comes to passing shots, I still think that it's possible if perfectly constructed and well thought out to win a match serving & volleying.

Another thing, I never considered Pete a true serve & volley player, well, not a classic one atleast. He was coming in behind an enoromous 135mph serve and TREMENDOUSLY hit forehands. He was more modern and less than classic, but I appreciated it.

Castafiore
11-09-2005, 11:44 PM
IF you can end points fromt he baseline and feel very confident in the %'s being in your favor from back there, you will tend not to use the other strokes. That's what we have today. IN most matches, you will have two palyers exchanging almost identical strokes from the baseline until some gets the upper hand. In truth, it probably IS the % play right now.
Playing from the baseline can offer a variety of shots from the bh and/or from the fh as well.

Somebody posted a link to this in another message board and this discussion reminds me of it. It's a fantastic rally from the baseline.

baseline battle (http://www.atptennis.com/en/mercedesbenz/archive.asp?AssetID=851)

Watch Gaudio and Nadal play each other from the baseline and see the variety of fh shots from Nadal for example: see him mix up the placement, the timing, the speed, the trajectory, the height,...
You can argue that Nadal mostly uses his fh here but that's ignoring the way he changes and mixes that up.

mandoura
11-09-2005, 11:51 PM
The game is transitioning. Your getting lots of bolters in the new styles, and people are adjusting. Eventually, it evens out. The game has been in transition for the past five or so years, and we're seeing emerging players who have varying styles of enjoyable tennis emerge who have adjusted to the new pars set by other players. Players are learning to be more patient (Gonzalez recently, and some other shot-makers), getting used to the pace of the ball (Roddick's serve is not bailing him out like it used to for a very good reason), and eventually more players will learn to keep their concentration high enough to beat moonballing speedsters by patiently constructing long points and eventually finishing off at the midcourt and the net. This year I have seen more netplay from top players than before due to a lot of speedsters comming up. Give it another year or so.

That's a very good post. Thank you.

celia
11-09-2005, 11:53 PM
if that's so, how come he's always putting me down then?
well that's not nice. i meant that folks should be entitled to express their tennis opinions freely. i don't see the point about putting people down for their views.

ys
11-09-2005, 11:54 PM
The game is becoming ugly, with all of these extreme grips and the usage of heavy spin, you have many freak victories, because they play such an unusual game that it's difficult to pick up on the 1st or 2nd time you meet them. I won't say any names, but this new generation of tennis is sort of becoming a combination of ball-bashing and moonball tennis, not to mention with the steroid era, certain french open players that were runner-up to Nadal will make unusually speedy progress ... quite mysterious huh :retard:


I am very much in agreement with the sentiment.. Watching extreme western grips of like of Nadal The Moonballer Supreme and others produce nothing but safe heavy topspin and not much else is extremely boring..

Still thing are not that bad yet.. Nadal is a defensive player. Those never dominate and never last long.. Other Spanish claycourters are mostly gone.. South Americans are demoralized. Federer still have few years in him. Safin is OK.. Gasquet is very watchable.. And a clay season is only two months long and they don't show much of it in USA anyway.. And on other surfaces moonballers are being beaten like a drum.. It could have been worse.. Oh well, it still can..

revolution
11-10-2005, 12:02 AM
well that's not nice. i meant that folks should be entitled to express their tennis opinions freely. i don't see the point about putting people down for their views.

Don't worry, I've been used to that since I joined. I may have been on here for a while now but that's never going to change.

prima donna
11-10-2005, 12:04 AM
Playing from the baseline can offer a variety of shots from the bh and/or from the fh as well.

Somebody posted a link to this in another message board and this discussion reminds me of it. It's a fantastic rally from the baseline.

baseline battle (http://www.atptennis.com/en/mercedesbenz/archive.asp?AssetID=851)

Watch Gaudio and Nadal play each other from the baseline and see the variety of fh shots from Nadal for example: see him mix up the placement, the timing, the speed, the trajectory, the height,...
You can argue that Nadal mostly uses his fh here but that's ignoring the way he changes and mixes that up.

Not to get off topic, but what impressed me most about that particular video is the fact that Gaudio's backhand was able to hold up under such pressure. I realize that it's his more reliable and stable shot, but that point defies everything that you're told with regards to attacking a one-handed backhand. High and deep balls are supposed to cause a problem right ? That was a solid point by Gaudio, sadly even a master of the backhand would agree a forehand will always prevail. Nice exhibit.

revolution
11-10-2005, 12:05 AM
Playing from the baseline can offer a variety of shots from the bh and/or from the fh as well.

Somebody posted a link to this in another message board and this discussion reminds me of it. It's a fantastic rally from the baseline.

baseline battle (http://www.atptennis.com/en/mercedesbenz/archive.asp?AssetID=851)

Watch Gaudio and Nadal play each other from the baseline and see the variety of fh shots from Nadal for example: see him mix up the placement, the timing, the speed, the trajectory, the height,...
You can argue that Nadal mostly uses his fh here but that's ignoring the way he changes and mixes that up.


Yeah, the forehand is not an easy technique, but when people mix it up, it's great to watch on any surface.

That rally yes on play of the year contenders...a bit let down by Gaudio messing the last shot!

celia
11-10-2005, 12:06 AM
Don't worry, I've been used to that since I joined. I may have been on here for a while now but that's never going to change.
it may not change but it can certainly make people reluctant to partcipate.

thankfully i'm too thick-skinned to care. but even i was shocked that someone name tangerine-dream gave me a bad rep yesterday bec she disagreed with me. i mean how sick is that?

frankly the whole reputation feature of this board needs to be gotten rid of. it serves no useful purpose. or maybe people should only be able to pos rep each other as short-cut way of sending PM's. that makes more sense to me.

revolution
11-10-2005, 12:09 AM
it may not change but it can certainly make people reluctant to partcipate.

thankfully i'm too thick-skinned to care. but even i was shocked that someone name tangerine-dream gave me a bad rep yesterday bec she disagreed with me. i mean how sick is that?

frankly the whole reputation feature of this board needs to be gotten rid of. it serves no useful purpose. or maybe people should only be able to pos rep each other as short-cut way of sending PM's. that makes more sense to me.

Hmm.. she's a nice'un, so you must have gotten on her case.

Sometimes bad repping is justified, if someone posts something abusive or trolling in players fan forums, and I've had a few threatening cherries for airing my opinion, I mean, some players I don't like, but I would never troll in their forums, as it's way below the belt. GM, as GWH has said before, is a warzone, so anything goes in there.

jole
11-10-2005, 12:34 AM
it may not change but it can certainly make people reluctant to partcipate.

thankfully i'm too thick-skinned to care. but even i was shocked that someone name tangerine-dream gave me a bad rep yesterday bec she disagreed with me. i mean how sick is that?

frankly the whole reputation feature of this board needs to be gotten rid of. it serves no useful purpose. or maybe people should only be able to pos rep each other as short-cut way of sending PM's. that makes more sense to me.

Bad reps are a joke, I wouldn't worry about it. However, some of the crap people post on this board is incredibly laughable; it would be wrong to not challenge it. :p Some people here use personal attacks, but at the same time a lot of people confuse eloquently put arguments that they have no legitimate response to with personal attacks.

Regarding the original topic, clearly the "old school" style of playing tennis has gone away for the most part. The reasons for this have already been stated. 90(+)% of young kids are taught that the right way is to play with moderate to heavy topspin from the ground and to just wail away on the ball. Coaches stress that short balls have to be attacked and you must get to the net, but still only truly talented players truly master this to a world class level. Like said before, most simply focus on the hitting an utterly huge approach shot and making it where the volley is easy enough that a beginner could execute it.

With players like Rafael Nadal succeeding even on fast courts, it is only going to continue to bolster this type of play. You can't blame Nadal either, he is playing a brand of tennis he loves and winning a hell of a lot of matches. It is up to all court or even "old school" players other than Federer to challenge him, even on clay. Until this starts happening regularly on the tour, I don't think the common way to teach tennis (bashing heavy strokes from the back) will change much at all.

Castafiore
11-10-2005, 01:04 AM
90(+)% of young kids are taught that the right way is to play with moderate to heavy topspin from the ground and to just wail away on the ball.

...

bashing heavy strokes from the back
Sorry but you're oversimplifying things a bit here.

In my opinion, some of you guys are a bit too poetic when you're talking about your view on "old school tennis", referring to finesse, refinement, skill,...
but once you start talking about what you perceive as the alternative, you oversimplify things. Where does that love for finesse and refinement go all of a sudden?

That's odd.

jole
11-10-2005, 01:08 AM
Sorry but you're oversimplifying things a bit here.

In my opinion, some of you guys are a bit too poetic when you're talking about your view on "old school tennis", referring to finesse, refinement, skill,...
but once you start talking about what you perceive as the alternative, you oversimplify things. Where does that love for finesse and refinement go all of a sudden?

That's odd.

Sorry, I wasn't attempting a thesis.

Explain what you want people to elaborate more on. The way that the current game that most use now still requires tremendous ability, strategy, mechanics, and effort? I have no problem doing that.

Castafiore
11-10-2005, 01:14 AM
I wasn't asking you to write a thesis. Don't get too defensive on me here.

It's just odd that some of you wax on about 'old school' tennis but once you start talking about an alternative way of playing tennis, descriptions like 'wailing back the ball' or just 'heavy topspin' appear when you know as well as I do that there's much more to it than that but that's probably not the point. The point is to get a viewpoint across by exaggerating the contrast.

At least, that's how I see many comments in here. I'm sure you disagree with me. ;)

jole
11-10-2005, 01:25 AM
I wasn't asking you to write a thesis. Don't get too defensive on me here.

I just it odd that some of you wax on about 'old school' tennis but once you start talking about an alternative way of playing tennis, descriptions like 'wailing back the ball' appear.

Don't worry, I'm not going to get offended on a virtual mesage board. :p Ok, let me clarify.

I for the most part love the way tennis is currently played. All I was trying to say is that I wholeheartedly agree with the fact that the older brands of playing tennis is declining. I also wanted to explain that I have a tremendous respect for people who play that way, especially these days - it just isn't my cup of tea.

Winning from the baseline definitely isn't as easy as people make it sound, especially at world class levels. People say, "well soandso just blasted him off the court and that's boring", but in reality it took extremely solid groundstrokes accompanied by at least a decent strategy to defeat someone across the net who is hitting their groundstrokes very well too and covering the court like a gazaelle quite often.

The timing and eye-hand coordination required to make up effective groundstrokes on the ATP tour is extremely admirable. Taking 130 mph serves on the rise for clean, precise groundstokes only looks easy unless people got a chance to try doing it.

prima donna
11-10-2005, 01:47 AM
I wasn't asking you to write a thesis. Don't get too defensive on me here.

It's just odd that some of you wax on about 'old school' tennis but once you start talking about an alternative way of playing tennis, descriptions like 'wailing back the ball' or just 'heavy topspin' appear when you know as well as I do that there's much more to it than that but that's probably not the point. The point is to get a viewpoint across by exaggerating the contrast.

At least, that's how I see many comments in here. I'm sure you disagree with me. ;)
Applying heavy top spin is a rather elementary tactic, actually, I know a few 3.5 players at my club that can have you swinging near the top of the Statue of Liberty. Anyone can brush up underneath the ball and obviously physical conditioning plays a part in it, but aside from that there is no timing or precision needed to keep the ball in play. The only defensive player that is respectable is Lleyton Hewitt, the young lad is both a gentleman and plays a classic game of defensive tennis.

jole
11-10-2005, 01:59 AM
Applying heavy top spin is a rather elementary tactic, actually, I know a few 3.5 players at my club that can have you swinging near the top of the Statue of Liberty. Anyone can brush up underneath the ball and obviously physical conditioning plays a part in it, but aside from that there is no timing or precision needed to keep the ball in play. The only defensive player that is respectable is Lleyton Hewitt, the young lad is both a gentleman and plays a classic game of defensive tennis.

Applying heavy topspin is easy no doubt, and I do agree that the prototypical beginner/intermediate player in tennis who has just learned topspin and bases their whole game around simply getting every ball back with disgusting amounts of topspin (purely upwards brush, zero actual outward stick on the ball) is:

1) Annoying and ugly to watch.
2) Not as effective as lessening the topspin used dramatically.

but wouldn't you agree someone like Nadal getting as much out of the game as he has so far is as much of a legitimate strategy as a cunning, thoughtful, more all-court player? I mean to each their own, no problem with that, but the fact that people are not stopping Nadal all that often, despite his simple game, is either a testament to Nadal being truly a respectable player, or just his competition isn't what it used to be many years ago on the tour.

I think perhaps it is a little of both, but at the same time the depth on the ATP tour is very deep. It's just that this depth is consisting mainly of baseliners that Nadal is able to wear down relatively easily - thus far at least.

prima donna
11-10-2005, 02:04 AM
Applying heavy topspin is easy no doubt, and I do agree that the prototypical beginner/intermediate player in tennis who has just learned topspin and bases their whole game around simply getting every ball back with disgusting amounts of topspin (purely upwards brush, zero actual outward stick on the ball) is:

1) Annoying and ugly to watch.
2) Not as effective as lessening the topspin used dramatically.

but wouldn't you agree someone like Nadal getting as much out of the game as he has so far is as much of a legitimate strategy as a cunning, thoughtful, more all-court player? I mean to each their own, no problem with that, but the fact that people are not stopping Nadal all that often, despite his simple game, is either a testament to Nadal being truly a respectable player, or just his competition isn't what it used to be many years ago on the tour.

I think perhaps it is a little of both, but at the same time the depth on the ATP tour is very deep. It's just that this depth is consisting mainly of baseliners that Nadal is able to wear down relatively easily - thus far at least.

Hey, all that I can say for Nadal is that he's a proven winner. He's like the New England Patriots and Federer is the Dallas Cowboys of the early 90's.

One wins pretty and the other just gets the job done, at the end of the day all that really matters is who wins and I've been through this so many times I'm not going to further comment on Nadal's game; however, I will say that Hewitt is classic in his play and a joy to watch, which is why he's won Wimbledon. :) I don't discriminate based on styles of play.

jole
11-10-2005, 02:15 AM
Hey, all that I can say for Nadal is that he's a proven winner. He's like the New England Patriots and Federer is the Dallas Cowboys of the early 90's.

One wins pretty and the other just gets the job done, at the end of the day all that really matters is who wins and I've been through this so many times I'm not going to further comment on Nadal's game; however, I will say that Hewitt is classic in his play and a joy to watch, which is why he's won Wimbledon. :) I don't discriminate based on styles of play.

Fair enough, there is obviously no problem with prefering one style of play over another. It is just good to see people explain why they have this preference in a logical manner, and to recognize other legitimate players as proven winners despite not liking them.

prima donna
11-10-2005, 02:25 AM
Fair enough, there is obviously no problem with prefering one style of play over another. It is just good to see people explain why they have this preference in a logical manner, and to recognize other legitimate players as proven winners despite not liking them.
I've explained many times and got bad repped each time. Let me explain this in a way that will not offend others:

I'd much prefer watching someone use their brain to construct points, coming to net and knowing when to come to net not only requires great reflexes but a wonderful knowledge of the game and you must have greatt intuition. The classic strokes of old times, that were generated with that old fashioned continental grip used by many of the past champions before the Borg Era is missed. I wasn't alive during that time, but I've seen enough tape and so forth to know that not only did it require actual knowledge of the game to win but impeccable timing.

Top Spin leaves so much margin for error and that's fine, every player uses a fair amount of spin on each of their shots anyway (excluding Jimmy Connors whom hit 99.9% of his shots flat).

Bill Tilden says in his book that the more skilled player is thrown off by poor conditions (rain & wind ), because they are so maticulous in their shot making and everything is done to a T, sometimes these clay courters just look like they are waiting for you to cry uncle after a 50 shot rally.

So, basically:
1). I have a disappreciation towards ball-bashers with only big serves and average groundstrokes because there's players ranked 150 in the world with just as much skill, sadly they don't possess a freak service motion. No names given.

I'd be lying if I didn't say this, because one of the main reasons is even 12 year olds can apply heavy top spin, the fun part of watching professional tennis is seeing players do what you can't. I can't hit an inside-out forehand the way these guys do, but when you see someone win a match by running back in forth and hitting balls that end up even on a guy like Safin's eyebrow it's sort of like ... um ... yea and your point being ?

I'm also against technology, I'd like to see wooden racket play brought back. I 2nd J. Mac :)

jole
11-10-2005, 02:26 AM
I've explained many times and got bad repped each time. Let me explain this in a way that will not offend others:

I'd much prefer watching someone use their brain to construct points, coming to net and knowing when to come to net not only requires great reflexes but a wonderful knowledge of the game and you must have greatt intuition. The classic strokes of old times, that were generated with that old fashioned continental grip used by many of the past champions before the Borg Era is missed. I wasn't alive during that time, but I've seen enough tape and so forth to know that not only did it require actual knowledge of the game to win but impeccable timing.

Top Spin leaves so much margin for error and that's fine, every player uses a fair amount of spin on each of their shots anyway (excluding Jimmy Connors whom hit 99.9% of his shots flat).

Bill Tilden says in his book that the more skilled player is thrown off by poor conditions (rain & wind ), because they are so maticulous in their shot making and everything is done to a T, sometimes these ball-bashers and clay courters just look like they are waiting for you to cry uncle after a 50 shot rally.

So, basically:
1). I have a disappreciation towards ball-bashers with only big serves and average groundstrokes because there's players ranked 150 in the world with just as much skill, sadly they don't possess a freak service motion. No names given.

I'd be lying if I didn't say this, because one of the main reasons is even 12 year olds can apply heavy top spin, the fun part of watching professional tennis is seeing players do what you can't. I can't hit an inside-out forehand the way these guys do, but when you see someone win a match by running back in forth and hitting balls that end up even on a guy like Safin's eyebrow it's sort of like ... um ... yea and your point being ?

I'm also against technology, I'd like to see wooden racket play brought back. I 2nd J. Mac :)


Right, I am clear on your position. I wasn't accusing you of that. The clarification was good, though.

Chloe le Bopper
11-10-2005, 03:52 AM
You know what really pisses me off? Colour TV. TV has never been the same. It's just not what it used to be, what it still could be. This fills me with sadness and rage.

Phunkadelicious
11-10-2005, 03:54 AM
You know what really pisses me off? Colour TV. TV has never been the same. It's just not what it used to be, what it still could be. This fills me with sadness and rage.

you are my hero :inlove:

jole
11-10-2005, 03:58 AM
You know what really pisses me off? Colour TV. TV has never been the same. It's just not what it used to be, what it still could be. This fills me with sadness and rage.

Don Budge would triple bagel Rafael Nadal, I hope you realize this.

Chloe le Bopper
11-10-2005, 03:59 AM
Don Budge would triple bagel Rafael Nadal, I hope you realize this.
He'd take ou the trash, so to speak?

jole
11-10-2005, 04:02 AM
He'd take ou the trash, so to speak?

Yes ma'am.

nkhera1
11-10-2005, 04:05 AM
Well its obvious that these players are having sucess bashing the ball so why should they change? Also Fed puts a ton of topspin on his shots so there goes that argument. Topspin is not the problem because it actually keeps the ball in play and if nobody can find a way to get around it than that is their problem. The gmae has changed so much that players like McEnroe and Borg can't win any more with their games (because of technology and everything else). Its not like Feder doesn't hit the ball hard either.

Merton
11-10-2005, 04:11 AM
We should make all necessary reforms to return the game to its noble origins. I suggest that apart from using wooden rackets, we should impose medieval times knight-armour. That way, we deter ball-bashers from running in a permanent way: How can they move carrying like 30kg of body armour?

Noelle
11-10-2005, 06:54 AM
We should make all necessary reforms to return the game to its noble origins. I suggest that apart from using wooden rackets, we should impose medieval times knight-armour. That way, we deter ball-bashers from running in a permanent way: How can they move carrying like 30kg of body armour?
:lol:

I'd say this thread and the people posting in it make good points, except for the jabs at certain players, even if they are unnamed. :tape:

che_rry
11-10-2005, 11:39 AM
the improvement of technique&technology ≠ the improment of beauty
usefull ≠ graceful

hitchhiker
11-10-2005, 12:01 PM
tennis is in the pits.
once andre retires its main rating rival will be hot dog eating competitions especially now that the young american protege can eat 150 hot dogs in 40 minutes.

hitchhiker
11-10-2005, 12:55 PM
and its no coincidence not one but two players are virtually unbeatable (one is a 19 year old rookie by the way) and arguably the 3rd best player in the world on hardcourts is approaching 36.
great tennis era.

uNIVERSE mAN
11-10-2005, 01:16 PM
and its no coincidence not one but two players are virtually unbeatable (one is a 19 year old rookie by the way) and arguably the 3rd best player in the world on hardcourts is approaching 36.
great tennis era.

who's the 2nd?

Sjengster
11-10-2005, 01:17 PM
Hmm, I wonder?

hitchhiker
11-10-2005, 01:27 PM
who's the 2nd?

nadal probably but every 3-4 years its safin

hewitt keeps reaching semis/finals of slams while virtually never playing lol

Sjengster
11-10-2005, 01:56 PM
OK... one is a 19-year old rookie, and the second is probably Nadal? Reading comprehension, hitchie, it is important.

Whistleway
11-10-2005, 04:29 PM
George Hitler is always judgemental, as though his word is equivalent to the gospel truth.

That's because he lives in his basement with his mom. Can't blame him now, right?

prima donna
11-10-2005, 07:27 PM
That's because he lives in his basement with his mom. Can't blame him now, right?
:devil:

mandoura
11-10-2005, 11:18 PM
:topic:

I must admit that, with the exception of 2 or 3 posts, this thread is turning into apretty instructional and interesting one. A big thank you to the guys/gals posting. Keep it up, I am really enjoying my read.

Action Jackson
11-11-2005, 06:16 AM
That's because he lives in his basement with his mom. Can't blame him now, right?

That is so astute and brilliant, too bad I saw you leaving my mothers room the other night, even better that this room is in the morgue.

SwissMister1
11-11-2005, 06:42 AM
Applying heavy topspin is easy no doubt, and I do agree that the prototypical beginner/intermediate player in tennis who has just learned topspin and bases their whole game around simply getting every ball back with disgusting amounts of topspin (purely upwards brush, zero actual outward stick on the ball) is:
1) Annoying and ugly to watch.
2) Not as effective as lessening the topspin used dramatically.


Hey, that's how I play! :p

nkhera1
11-14-2005, 03:04 AM
Just to bring up a point for Myskina lover or whatever her name is, but you do realize that Federer uses a lot of topspin (probably hits one of the heavist balls on tour) which is what makes him so good, so anyways there goes your theory.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:08 AM
Just to bring up a point for Myskina lover or whatever her name is, but you do realize that Federer uses a lot of topspin (probably hits one of the heavist balls on tour) which is what makes him so good, so anyways there goes your theory.
That's not all that "makes him so good", but there are different variations and usages of top spin. The last time I checked, I didn't see Roger moonballing anyone, but that's just me and people that choose to apply common sense when they read. :)

He uses Top Spin in an offensive manner, not in a defensive manner, but this thread is so old and I've grown bored of this topic so I'm not up for any further discussion of it.

This post looks familiar anyway, repetition much ?

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:14 AM
Computers also make me angry. Whatever happened to the good old days of typewriters and regular mail? :(

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:20 AM
Computers also make me angry. Whatever happened to the good old days of typewriters and regular mail? :(
You'd think recycling the same routine time and time would become boring, then again, some are more easily amused than others.

:zzz:

nkhera1
11-14-2005, 03:22 AM
Sampras was somewhat old school, even his racquet was a modernized rip-off of the Jack Kramer. Federer is very old school, which is exactly why he dominates. The game is becoming ugly, with all of these extreme grips and the usage of heavy spin, you have many freak victories, because they play such an unusual game that it's difficult to pick up on the 1st or 2nd time you meet them. I won't say any names, but this new generation of tennis is sort of becoming a combination of ball-bashing and moonball tennis, not to mention with the steroid era, certain french open players that were runner-up to Nadal will make unusually speedy progress ... quite mysterious huh

Reading comprehension is good for you. How many players hit moon-balls often. Also you said top-spin not offensively or defensively and Federer uses a lot of topspin but he just hits with better trajectories. Even though Fed uses different spins majority of hits shots have a ton of top spin which is something you didn't like. Its easy to just sit here and say that anyone can just hit defense topspin shots back but thats not how it works.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:25 AM
You'd think recycling the same routine time and time would become boring, then again, some are more easily amused than others.

:zzz:
This coming from somebody that has 2343 threads that are all more or less about the same thing?

Oh no. You di'int.

nkhera1
11-14-2005, 03:26 AM
You'd think recycling the same routine time and time would become boring, then again, some are more easily amused than others.

:zzz:

Also what about Roddick's attitude do you not like?

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:27 AM
Reading comprehension is good for you. How many players hit moon-balls often. Also you said top-spin not offensively or defensively and Federer uses a lot of topspin but he just hits with better trajectories. Even though Fed uses different spins majority of hits shots have a ton of top spin which is something you didn't like. Its easy to just sit here and say that anyone can just hit defense topspin shots back but thats not how it works.

Let me make this more clear for you.

Ready ?

We're going through a 3 step program and it's called "operation: PAY ATTENTION!

1). I don't see any similarities at all in the way prototypical clay courters play and Roger.

Example:
Gaudio, Coria, Nadal - 3 players, using HEAVY top spin (almost moonballs), for exclusively defensive purposes

They all use Top Spin, but last time I checked their games looked nothing alike and other than basic fundamentals they don't approach their matches with any of the same things in mind.

2). Top Spin is not the problem here, there has never been a player in the history of tennis that exclusively hit flat aside from the American Jimmy Connors, so let's confront that issue right away. It is a safe and smart tactic, moonballing isn't and call it "changing trajectories" or whatever you may in-order to try making your argument sound complex.

3). There is nothing entertaining about watching someone run from side to side like a chicken with their head cut off, just hopelessly trying to stay in the point and screaming "Vamos!" or "Allez!" once their opponent makes an error.

So, now that I've made this clear: I no longer have anything to add regarding this thread or topic at this time.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:31 AM
This coming from somebody that has 2343 threads that are all more or less about the same thing?

Oh no. You di'int.

Another desperate cry for attention, it's one thing to be a Drama Queen and a completely different thing to be one over the internet. Get a hold of yourself, go join a book club. It's not that serious. Move on.

nkhera1
11-14-2005, 03:33 AM
Let me make this more clear for you.

Ready ?

We're going through a 3 step program and it's called "operation: PAY ATTENTION!

1). I don't see any similarities at all in the way prototypical clay courters play and Roger.

Example:
Gaudio, Coria, Nadal - 3 players, using HEAVY top spin (almost moonballs), for exclusively defensive purposes

They all use Top Spin, but last time I checked their games looked nothing alike and other than basic fundamentals they don't approach their matches with any of the same things in mind.

2). Top Spin is not the problem here, there has never been a player in the history of tennis that exclusively hit flat aside from the American Jimmy Connors, so let's confront that issue right away. It is a safe and smart tactic, moonballing isn't and call it "changing trajectories" or whatever you may in-order to try making your argument sound complex.

3). There is nothing entertaining about watching someone run from side to side like a chicken with their head cut off, just hopelessly trying to stay in the point and screaming "Vamos!" or "Allez!" once their opponent makes an error.

So, now that I've made this clear: I no longer have anything to add regarding this thread or topic at this time.

1.) Well i guess its best to specify what surface we are talking about and if a player is fit and athletic enough to keep hitting moon balls and still when then they deserve props and that can be very exciting. Also there have been counter-punches for a very long time so this isn't anything new.

2.) You must be pretty retarded because nothing I said was that complex in that line and of course its impossible to hit with no topspin.

3.) Is this a fact?

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:34 AM
Another desperate cry for attention, it's one thing to be a Drama Queen and a completely different thing to be one over the internet. Get a hold of yourself, go join a book club. It's not that serious. Move on.
But... but.. I'm not the one who makes 23432 thread about the same thing! Stay on topic, silly bear.

nkhera1
11-14-2005, 03:34 AM
You'd think recycling the same routine time and time would become boring, then again, some are more easily amused than others.

:zzz:

Lol Hypocrite.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:37 AM
Lol Hypocrite.
I know, right? Yet I'm the one crying for attention. If I wanted attention, I'd post a photo of myself without a shirt on. And then a put a link to it in my signature.

nkhera1
11-14-2005, 03:40 AM
I know, right? Yet I'm the one crying for attention. If I wanted attention, I'd post a photo of myself without a shirt on. And then a put a link to it in my signature.

LOL I never even realized that.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:40 AM
I know, right? Yet I'm the one crying for attention. If I wanted attention, I'd post a photo of myself without a shirt on.

Sigh.

I guess, but posting a topless picture of yourself probably would attract negative attention and that can't be good for an internet socialite like yourself. :)

jole
11-14-2005, 03:40 AM
I know, right? Yet I'm the one crying for attention. If I wanted attention, I'd post a photo of myself without a shirt on. And then a put a link to it in my signature.

The photo of Crosby autographing your rack is good enough.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:41 AM
I guess, but posting a topless picture of yourself probably would attract negative attention and that can't be good for an internet socialite like yourself. :)
Popular rumour has it that I'm obese! Just ask Dirk and Tennischick. They like to pass this stuff around. I even made an avatar in their honour once! Assuming that they haven't already properly notified you :kiss:

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:42 AM
The photo of Crosby autographing your rack is good enough.
Heehee.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:45 AM
Popular rumour has it that I'm obese! Just ask Dirk and Tennischick. They like to pass this stuff around. I even made an avatar in their honour once! Assuming that they haven't already properly notified you :kiss:
Uh ... haha ? This falls under the category of very insignificant bullshit, if I was entertained that easily I'd go to the supermarket and purchase a copy of the Enquirer. MTF Rumor has it you say ? You CANNOT be serious.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:47 AM
Uh ... haha ? This falls under the category of very insignificant bullshit, if I was entertained that easily I'd go to the supermarket and purchase a copy of the Enquirer. MTF Rumor has it you say ? You CANNOT be serious.
Hey, as stupid as you think it is, I assure you that I find it far more asinine.

Besides, that's what you implied, so I shared the popular rumour with you!

Sheesh.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:51 AM
Hey, as stupid as you think it is, I assure you that I find it far more asinine.

Besides, that's what you implied, so I shared the popular rumour with you!

Sheesh.

wonderful thank u for the vital information hun it's appreciated :hug: anything else

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 03:52 AM
wonderful thank u for the vital information hun it's appreciated :hug: anything else
Um, seeing you reminded me to take my medication today?

Scotso
11-14-2005, 03:53 AM
I doubt that's even him, as he confessed once that he weighs nearly 400lbs.

And even if it was him, he isn't that cute. A six pack does not a hottie make.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:55 AM
I doubt that's even him, as he confessed once that he weighs nearly 400lbs.

And even if it was him, he isn't that cute. A six pack does not a hottie make.

Just because you resemble one of the coneheads or a cancer patient, don't start getting on my tail. It's always the most hideous of creatures that insist on giving their input. I don't see a six pack, actually, I hadn't even paid much attention to the fact that one of the photos was topless. I'm a stick and there's not much to show off. I'm average looking, simply bored and sharing my pictures so that social misfits such as yourself have something to discuss over your midnight snack consisting of 2 boxes of oreo's and a gallon of milk.

prima donna
11-14-2005, 03:56 AM
Um, seeing you reminded me to take my medication today?
you can't critique a masterpiece ... next topic princess ? please ? :)

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:02 AM
you can't critique a masterpiece ... next topic princess ? please ? :)
I meant seeing you posting, btw. And you really did!

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:02 AM
Just because you resemble one of the coneheads or a cancer patient, don't start getting on my tail. It's always the most hideous of creatures that insist on giving their input. I don't see a six pack, actually, I hadn't even paid much attention to the fact that one of the photos was topless. I'm a stick and there's not much to show off. I'm average looking, simply bored and sharing my pictures so that social misfits such as yourself have something to discuss over your midnight snack consisting of 2 boxes of oreo's and a gallon of milk.

Mmmm oreos :drool:

I don't like milk that much, though. Orange soda for me, please! :D

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:03 AM
you can't critique a masterpiece ... next topic princess ? please ? :)

there's no ' in "its best"

prima donna
11-14-2005, 04:05 AM
there's no ' in "its best"
You know, you should really designate/restrict yourself to tennis related topics. I was having a perfectly good time with Chloe, this is better than HBO and suddenly you came along ... with your very dry and dense sense of "humor" ... if you wanna call it that.

You've got a personality that could put corpses to sleep, give it a rest.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:06 AM
Mmmm oreos :drool:

I don't like milk that much, though. Orange soda for me, please! :D
Milk goes right through me, and it takes everything else with it. It's poison.

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:10 AM
You know, you should really designate/restrict yourself to tennis related topics. I was having a perfectly good time with Chloe, this is better than HBO and suddenly you came along ... with your very dry and dense sense of "humor" ... if you wanna call it that.

You've got a personality that could put corpses to sleep, give it a rest.

I can't help it. I had explosive diarrhea and this is the only toilet I could find.

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:10 AM
Milk goes right through me, and it takes everything else with it. It's poison.

lactose intolerant?

I'm not allergic to milk or anything, i just don't fancy the taste.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:14 AM
lactose intolerant?


Very.

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:16 AM
They make a pill for that. Then you can enjoy all the milk you want. And cheese.

I like cheese. What's your favorite kind? I think swiss is my favorite.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:20 AM
Swiss is certainly my favourite.

And they do make pills for it, but pills cost money. It's hard for a bum like me to afford them. Especially on top of all my OTHER meds.

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:21 AM
My schizo meds costs a forture. But life without dairy would be hard.

Yay, swiss lovers unite! :bounce:

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:24 AM
Life without foo... er, dairy keeps me thin.

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:26 AM
i'll eat all your foo.... er, dairy for you! :drool:

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:27 AM
How about the bowl of dry cereal that I can't finish? Cornpops. I was going ot eat them in the morning.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:28 AM
Oh, we're talking about dairy. DUH. Go to bed, Rebecca.

Scotso
11-14-2005, 04:31 AM
No, I couldn't deny you your food for the week!

I must go now, I have to roll myself to bed! :wavey:

prima donna
11-14-2005, 04:31 AM
Pretty scary stuff.

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:38 AM
Oh come off it, you know that dairy and eating disorders are your topics of choice!

prima donna
11-14-2005, 04:43 AM
Oh come off it, you know that dairy and eating disorders are your topics of choice!
Have you lost your mind, lady ?

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 04:46 AM
Quite a while ago, yes. Let me know if you find it, k?

prima donna
11-14-2005, 04:48 AM
You're not like 80 are you, living with 60 black cats ? I'm very concerned. You have disturbed me and that's quite a task. Scary ...

Chloe le Bopper
11-14-2005, 05:22 AM
My cats are all shapes and colours. I don't discriminate. Though, I must confess that I do favour the old decrepit ones that smell of stale cigar smoke.

tennisinparis
11-14-2005, 05:48 AM
ok, now that i have read all the post(yes I am bored to death), I will comment. myskinalova is correct there aren't many 'old school' players like federer, but I really don't understand how you cannot appreciate all types of tennis. I mean everyone is different, and have to solve problems (or tennis matches) in different ways, and that is the beauty of it. Sure Nadal and many clay courters are 'moonball hitters' as you say, but as many have said here, i think you over simplify it. I do not understand how you can claim that players like Federer(okay that made me laugh, since there are no other players like Federer) are so wise and plan all their shot and are just remarkable because they are so savy on the court, but then accuse other players of not playing smart tennis. Do you really think that players like Nadla, Coria, etc. do not think about where they are going to place the ball in the court(whether it be moonballed or not). I mean they have just as good a strategy of where to place the ball, and what they need to do to win the point. Sure there are shots they make as defensive players that allow them to get back into a point, but a majority of their shots are very planned. Unfortunately not everyone has the talent and ability of people like Federer and Santoro, etc. So some other people have to resort to changing speeds, heights, and other things people have already mentioned here.

I guess I don't choose what players I like by the style of tennis they play, I usually choose the players I like by the effort they give, and how much they enjoy the tennis they are playing, because that makes a difference to me. I mean I LOVE watching Federer play when his game is on, and I love watching Nadal play when he is able to scrap and get back in points and end up winning them. I mean, you almost make it seem as if Nadal has less than 5 winners a match. On the opposite end, Andy Roddick is so annoying because it just feels like he is wilting away and not giving any effort.

Okay, there is my opinion, and it amounts for nothing, just sometimes I feel frustrated at people's inability to comprehend two sides of a situation.

its.like.that
11-14-2005, 05:49 AM
Milk goes right through me, and it takes everything else with it. It's poison.

I can't get enough of it. :D

It's the best thing since the berth of Tennis Fool.

:p

its.like.that
11-14-2005, 05:52 AM
You're not like 80 are you, living with 60 black cats ? I'm very concerned. You have disturbed me and that's quite a task. Scary ...

:bowdown: