Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In the Peter Luczak retirement thread,

Posted by FairWeatherFan:

An "Australian" whose favourite surface is clay doesn't deserve respect. There have been many Australian journeymen who played attractive, exciting tennis, but Luczak was just another generic, gutless baseliner.


Also so many times there are people on here in various threads bashing other players game styles.

Do you people honestly think players "choose" to play their game style when they are young?

Game styles are something that is developed from a young age with technique and court surface that they are brought up playing on. Game styles can be modified slightly over time of course, and also depend on physical development and height. They just come natural to a player as they grow up, they don't "choose" to be a serve volleyer or a claycourt grinder....the same as the technique theyve learnt (grip, contact point) decides whether they hit flat or with Topspin.

Do you think Karlovic and Isner could really choose to be grinders? or Olivier Rochus a serve volleyer?

Alot of it also depends on talent, why choose to come to the net and volley if you don't have naturally good hands? You can improve your volleys of course, but your reaction and coordination is more important in how good your volleys will be.

AS for Luczak, im not sure where FairWeatherFan comes from in Australia??? but the courts in Melbourne at the various suburban tennis clubs are mainly clay courts, hence Luczak grew up on clay from a young age, hence his clay court game style, and extreme forehand grip. Also, If you read Peter's interview at the Australian open yesterday after retiring, he's the first guy to admit he's not as talented as others, hence his work ethic. How do you expect him to be a great shotmaker if he doesn't have that natural ability to hit booming winners off both sides....he just made the most of what he had...and find ways to win with what he had.

It's a pity there isn't more Australians who's favourite surface is clay, as tennis would not be in the state which the country is in now and has been the past 10 years....and why do you think its Europeans who dominate tennis now, and not Australians, English or Americans...

It's alright for people to have an opinion, after all, this is a discussion forum, but please have a knowledgeable and informed opinion before you go shooting your mouth off about people, backed up by fact.

It's no problem to admit there are players you don't enjoy watching or are not entertaining, but to say they "don't deserve respect" because of their game style, is a joke......

For example, i don't like watching Isner at all, but i don't say his game style doesn't deserve respect...he hasn't finished top 20 for last 2 years and made over 1 million dollars each year for no reason....

People on here call Gilles Simon and Murray pushers....go and ask any of the pro players if they think Murray and Simon can shotmake and have weapons or not....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
:rolleyes: I always thought English were Europeans although many of them might disagree in this one :)

As for styles, there are as many opinions and likes as there are people, so why bother with such questions. It's all about preferences and I think each style of play has its fans. Still, some styles are more pleasing to the eye than others. Although this might be cosidered subjective as well.

Whether they choose their style, I think to some extent they do. A lot depends on the coach and on homeland traditions maybe, a lot depends on physical abilities, but they are still their own people, and as a child everybody looks up to someone and instinctively tries to copy them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
You're right about English being europeans, yes, my bad, but you know what i meant....I'll say compared to "continental europe" :p

I disagree that everyone instinctively tries to copy someone. It does happen sometimes(for example, Dimitrov and Federer - nice example as i see you are from Bulgaria) but not everyone tries to copy their idol with their strokes...

Its like saying every current top 15-20 Juniors in the world, the ones who idolise Federer will have a one handed backhand...but how often do you see one handers these days...

Or like saying that all the girls now who are in their 20's, who idolised Steffi Graf, will have good slice backhands - hint: how many times can you see a woman that can actually slice these days??

It would mean most of the guys who are 25 now, would be playing like the majority of guys from 17 years ago, it doesn't happen like that obviously...tennis has changed alot...

I see your point, and i think yes everyone has someone they look up to and admire, but it doesn't mean they "instinctively" try to copy them :)

I think theyre more likely to take their idols "personality traits" such as how they behave on the court, or their clothes, as much as their strokes....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
This is why I used the word 'instinctively' - I think most of them don't realize they are copying someone. But it is a law of nature, this is how we learn to walk, talk, etc. We see others do it and try to do the same. When you start playing a sport, you don't from the get go know how to do it, you look at others and acquire a certain style.

You are right that it might be similar with copying of personality traits although this is most likely to stop at a certain age. With tennis, however, once you have the basis, it doesn't really change, you can only improve on it.

Dimitrov is more an example of conscious copying.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top