Mens Tennis Forums banner

61 - 78 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,556 Posts
If someone was born with tennis skills, then talent is really overrated
I mean who deserves more credit, the one born with the talent, or the one who had to work hard to overcome his lack of talent? Obviously the latter one deserves much more credit, if we got by this definition of "born with"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Q: What is talent?
Ans: Watch Roger Federer playing Tennis.

Q: What is not talent?:
Ans: Watch Andy Murray playing Tennis.

Q: What if I still don't get it?
Ans: You are moron.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,858 Posts
Re: Video - What is talent: Rafa Fed Gasquet Robredo

According to most MTF posters, Gasquet or Wawrinka are more talented than Nadal!
According to 90% of tennis fans everyone is more talented than Nadal. But none of them active aside from Federer has won more.


ITS THE SUM OF THE PARTS. Nadal has ENOUGH OF EVERYTHING to be great. He is the greatest fighter since Connors. That's a big factor too. Because he has beaten more naturally gifted players like Federer. Many times because of his sheer will to win. And it's that will to win that made me one of his biggest fans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,556 Posts
Q: What is talent?
Ans: Watch Roger Federer playing Tennis.

Q: What is not talent?:
Ans: Watch Andy Murray playing Tennis.

Q: What if I still don't get it?
Ans: You are moron.
What is talent? Just read "Fastgrass" ability to write crap posts on a daily basis here, this is real talent combined with brilliant consistency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
What is talent? Just read "Fastgrass" ability to write crap posts on a daily basis here, this is real talent combined with brilliant consistency.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,644 Posts
It is too subjective and it can not be defined. It's like asking what is the most beautiful song in the world ... who is the most beautiful woman in the world? ... It's pointless.

Let's put it this way. If you have some talent but you can't convert it to tangible results it means nothing. If you have very little talent but somehow you work hard and you can deliver results, then you've made it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,408 Posts
I maintain that Federer has less talent than most top 50 players. He's severely lacking power off the ground and gets outhit by guys as ordinary as Millman. The USO commentators even remarked that Federer's advantage was "variety," while Millman had the power advantage.

And I maintain he has more mental strength. It takes more mental strength to live and die by a serve, as Federer does, than when you have the talent to hit incredible groundstrokes like Nadal and Djokovic.

And not only that, but Federer lives and dies by a serve that lacks power. He relies on precision and percentages in order to win...and that is a helluva lot of pressure.
Did you actually watch the Millman match? He wasn’t outhit. He outhit himself with almost 80 unforced errors and was in bad physical condition due to heat and humidity. Millman is a counterpuncher, something that federer is known to struggle with when not at his best (similar to Simon) and about as powerless as it can get.

But why I’m asking it’s like you’ve never seen any federer match at all. Just because he doesn’t grunt loudly and doesn’t try to kill the ball on every shot doesn’t mean he has no power. I recommend to watch the us open 2008 sf and f and then tell me again that federer can’t generate pace off the ground.

It’s true that federer has a better serve than nadal and djokovic and that it helps him to scrap through matches when he’s not playing at his best. Everyone knows it and nobody denies it. But saying now that federer can’t keep up with nadal and djokovic off the ground is really silly because that’s exactly what happened in their last 3 matches. Go back watch the shanghai final and nadal‘s botting while federer dominated the rallies.

Man this is only your second posting and both are so stupid that it almost makes me vomit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,792 Posts
Talent is mostly will.

Loads of players have a good hand, a good touch, are crafty or creative. But few have the will to spend hours on court and to do everything it costs to win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,408 Posts
When did Federer keep up with Djokovic off the ground? Nadal was injured in Shanghai, in case you forgot.

Federer doesn't lack power because he doesn't grunt. He lacks power because he gets outhit vs. almost everybody in the game and survives with his serve and defense.
What about Indian Wells? Or Miami? Was nadal injured in those matches too? Or what about the fifth set of the AO final? Where federer hit winners everyone and won almost all of the long rallies.

Paris 2018 SF for example. Federer‘s serve was really bad in this match (djokovic was serving much better there) but he still managed to save all bps. Mostly with his ground game to take a recent example. But I’ve alreqdy told you. Go watch uso 2008 sf. The first 2 minutes of the 21 min. Highlight video are enough to make you look like a complete fool.

When does federer actually get „outhit“. Mostly the matches are on his racket and he lives and dies with his consistency and errors. It’s very rare that he has no clue what to do. One of the prime examples is the AO 16 SF but even then federer could up his game in the third and outplay djokovic. He just wasn’t consistent enough throughout and too far behind.
Aside from a few matches on clay vs. Nadal there are really not many matches where he got outhit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,576 Posts
I maintain that Federer has less talent than most top 50 players. He's severely lacking power off the ground and gets outhit by guys as ordinary as Millman. The USO commentators even remarked that Federer's advantage was "variety," while Millman had the power advantage.

And I maintain he has more mental strength. It takes more mental strength to live and die by a serve, as Federer does, than when you have the talent to hit incredible groundstrokes like Nadal and Djokovic.

And not only that, but Federer lives and dies by a serve that lacks power. He relies on precision and percentages in order to win...and that is a helluva lot of pressure.

Ah, the old 'Santoro with a serve' schtick. Yawn, try something new for a change, thanks bye.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,562 Posts
Another reincarnation of a well-known, permabanned about 29344 times troll. Zzzzzzzzz....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,562 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,641 Posts
I maintain that Federer has less talent than most top 50 players. He's severely lacking power off the ground and gets outhit by guys as ordinary as Millman. The USO commentators even remarked that Federer's advantage was "variety," while Millman had the power advantage.

And I maintain he has more mental strength. It takes more mental strength to live and die by a serve, as Federer does, than when you have the talent to hit incredible groundstrokes like Nadal and Djokovic.

And not only that, but Federer lives and dies by a serve that lacks power. He relies on precision and percentages in order to win...and that is a helluva lot of pressure.
So if he has no power but still wins, that shows tremendous talent actually. You've shot yourself in the foot and don't even realise it :facepalm:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,408 Posts
AO 5th set and IW were "backhand fluke" examples.

I just watched the USO F vs. Murray that some delusional Federer fanboy told me was an example of his "devastatingz forehand" (which is hilarious, because...am I the only one who noticed that after I specifically focused on Federer in 2005-2007, Federer fanboys immediately jumped to 2008, the supposed "year of mono/past peak Federer?"). You know how many non-serve cleanup/passing shot winners he hit off his forehand in that match? A whopping 8. And Murray clipped the tape on one of them, leading to that being a cleanup forehand as well (but I counted it anyway since it wasn't off a serve).

I could find you tons of matches where he is at or near that figure with his backhand, yet even Federer fans admit his backhand is weak.

And then you brought up the early 2017 matches vs. Nadal, which were again based on his backhand, which even Federer fans call "weak"...but you still have yet to come up with anything to prove the supposed greatness of his forehand.

Oh, one more note on the Murray match: This was the skinny, pre-fitness obsession Murray, and he was battling a knee injury. He struggled to move and had no power off the ground. You watch him then and it's a night and day difference between that Murray and the one who contended for slams. The fact that this version of him reached the final tells you everything you need to know about that era of tennis.

Oh, and one more thing: Murray got a bad call on a ball Federer hit that was clearly out (that would've put him a break up in the 2nd set). So Murray managed to make this match competitive for a while despite being nowhere near the player he would become, and carrying an injury as well.
Oh the injury card again... but astonishing that injured skinny bad Murray could defeat nadal in the semis, right?

Did you really just sit there and counted the winners. Did you also include the easy Volleys or smashes he set up with the forehand? Did you count the errors he forced Murray into with his forehand? Murray reaches out to many extra balls, so not every deadly shot is an outright winner against him. Btw I said the sf was even better.

Want some great forehand matches? Check the following 5 matches out: Indian Wells 2005 final, cincinnati 2005 final, Wimbledon 2006 final, us open 2006 semifinal, Australian Open 2007 final.

Oh the atp released a video where players build their perfect player. Im pretty sure everyone who said Federer for the forehand there is a clueless mug and doesn’t have as much tennis knowledge as some online-warrior
 
61 - 78 of 78 Posts
Top