AUSTRALIAN OPEN, Melbourne, ATP GRAND SLAM

[Federberg]

Managed to watch it on youtube. Seems to be that JoW was accusing Stan of staring at him? Handbags

 

[DarthFed]

I can't wait to hear awful Mirka yell at Stan to make him derail...hope to see a good match with some fairplay from both parst including player's boxes....please Mirka SHUT UP and let the sport do the talking

Ah get over it. That was one hilarious exchange that happened a few years ago.

 

[DarthFed]

I think you're a nice, chill poster too, but I believe in what I say as I'm sure you do too, and everyone else who voices an opinion. The discussion was about volleying and it morphed into something totally different. I don't see why ya'll don't see that. You think it's convincing. I don't. I see it as a red herring that deviated from the original subject and turned it into a point that was never the nucleus of the discussion. It went all over the place and ended up nowhere because the original intent was obscured.

The sample makes no sense because the issue started out being that Roger had better volleys, not how many times he volleyed. That was never the topic of the discussion. It then went to accuracy and precision. Again, that has nothing to do with the sample.

I'm not being stubborn, but I also don't allow people to give me my opinion. Ever. I don't care if the entire world sees it differently. That's fine. I don't get mad about that, but how I feel is how I feel, and how you or anyone else takes it is on you, not me. Because in the scheme of the universe how many times Roger, Rafa, Novak or Andy volleys is infinitesimal, or in other words it doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

What I think is ridiculous is how people try to convince others to see things their way. When I state an opinion I'm not saying "I'm right, and you're wrong." So there's nothing to prove on my end. I believe that you have just reasons for feeling as you do. But here's the thing, I was talking to Carol not any of you guys because she and I tend to be on the same plane in many areas. I know that you all aren't, so to me it's rather silly to demand answers from you that I know in advance differ from my own. I also don't like or appreciate how it always turns into "ill-informed, ridiculous, stubborn, etc." I would never deign to tell you or anyone else who or what they are. I don't know you or anything about you to be that high-handed and arrogant, because that's what that comes off as to me. If you think Roger does this or that. That doesn't bother me. Why would I care about that? You're entitled to feel that way, and I'm entitled to not feel that way. It's that simple to me. People arguing about stuff that doesn't affect their life is ludicrous to me. I'll read your post and that's it. I don't feel a need to chastise you or anyone else about your opinion. Honestly, that is so stupid to me. I accept others opinions because it's based on them, their backgrounds and their experiences. Because of that we all have different opinions. I'm not trying to make anyone see it my way, and I'm not accepting your way when I feel differently.

That boggles my mind all the time on the internet, how people want to argue and debate AN OPINION. You can't debate an opinion, you can only debate facts and the fact of the matter is that we all have different opinions and opinions are neither right or wrong, they're simply how someone views the same situation.

But thank you for actually having a conversation and trying to understand where I'm coming from. Most people don't do that, they just barge in issuing directives as to what you need to do to fall in line with them. Understand, that I don't think the way that most people do. That's what I like most about myself. I'm an independent thinker with respect for everyone else opinions too.

The sample makes plenty of sense because, as others have tried to explain, part of the reason Roger goes to net a ton more than Rafa, Djokovic, and Murray, is that he is more comfortable up there and has better volleys than all of them. I don't know career %'s at net for all these players but if Roger's is higher than them that'd be insane since the others go up there to just finish off easy points.

 

[Federberg]

The sample makes plenty of sense because, as others have tried to explain, part of the reason Roger goes to net a ton more than Rafa, Djokovic, and Murray, is that he is more comfortable up there and has better volleys than all of them. I don't know career %'s at net for all these players but if Roger's is higher than them that'd be insane since the others go up there to just finish off easy points.

Precisely. If your percentages are better and you go there more often, what more needs to be said?

 

[mrzz]

Precisely. If your percentages are better and you go there more often, what more needs to be said?

"Sorry"?...

 

[Federberg]

"Sorry"?...

I meant that if Federer has better volleying success percentages than Novak and Rafa, and he goes to the net more often it proves the point that he is more adept at volleying than they are. Simple statistics

 

[mrzz]

I meant that if Federer has better volleying success percentages than Novak and Rafa, and he goes to the net more often it proves the point that he is more adept at volleying than they are. Simple statistics

Yeah, I got that. "Sorry" was a possible answer for "what else need to be said?".

 

[Federberg]

Yeah, I got that. "Sorry" was a possible answer for "what else need to be said?".

 

[Carol]

Video won't play?

Let me try this one

 

[mrzz]

^thanks for that... can someone translate what they are saying?

 

[Carol]

Then how do you explain that having so

Yeah, I got that. "Sorry" was a possible answer for "what else need to be said?".

Yes, then I don't understand why having so good volley he hasn't used so much against Nadal and having so good serve and Rafa waiting far back of the baseline why he haven't used more the S&V

 

[Federberg]

Then how do you explain that having so

Yes, then I don't understand why having so good volley he hasn't used so much against Nadal and having so good serve and Rafa waiting far back of the baseline why he haven't used more the S&V

Sigh.. do you really need to be spoon fed? In the first instance this does not disprove our assertion. But more importantly with modern string technology it's a losing proposition if you don't make an exceptional approach shot against a player with Rafa's calibre of movement. Rafa's weight of topspin pushes the opposition back, generally forcing approach shots are made when you're on the front foot. You've played tennis right? So I assume you can understand the dynamics

 

[mrzz]

Carol, you are confusing two different things. With today´s game, and today´s courts, all out S&V is simply not a good strategy anymore (since what, 2003?). Lodra, for example, was a fantastic S&V player. He maybe got to one master semi in all his carreer, nothing else. Federer does not use it more because it would be suicidal. Your question is the worst possible question about it, given that you specifically mentioned Nadal, and for me he has the best passing shot in the game in decades. Given that much of his game was crafted to counter Federer´s, why do you think he is such a good passer? Because the had to face a lousy volleyer? If you take out the occasional Zverev (or Lodra), Federer is still one of the guys who attacks the net more.

I could reverse the question: If Nadal has such a great volley (remember, I think he is pretty good too), why does not he goes more to the net? In USO 2013 he was serving pretty well... did he rushed to net a tad more than his average? No.

By the way, if you ask me why Federer´s net game is not that effective against Nadal (remembering still that most their matches were on clay), it is, IMO, because Federer ´s approach shots are not that good. They were good enough against the field, but Nadal was faster then the rest and had a better running forehand. I can remember a lot of situations were I felt that Federer approached the net too little too soon and payed the price...

 

[Denis]

I think this point that Federer faces more difficult volleys is a tad overstated. Yes, Fed attacks more, but he also only goes in when he can. He just plays way more aggressive from the back in order to get to the net quickly, hence his proness to shank. He takes risks in order to get at the net, he doesn't take that much risk at the net.

 

[Federberg]

^I think the point is that Rafa and Novak close out points at the net opportunistically, which in a way is the opposite of taking a risk. Roger crowds the net to take time and space away from his opponent. An inherently riskier proposition

 

[Carol]

Sigh.. do you really need to be spoon fed? In the first instance this does not disprove our assertion. But more importantly with modern string technology it's a losing proposition if you don't make an exceptional approach shot against a player with Rafa's calibre of movement. Rafa's weight of topspin pushes the opposition back, generally forcing approach shots are made when you're on the front foot. You've played tennis right? So I assume you can understand the dynamics

If I recall well the discussion started when one poster said the Roger is the most completed player including his volleys and then I said that in these last two years his volleys are not better than Nadal's and maybe because Rafa has played more doubles which has helped a lot to improve that shot, that's all

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

goffin vs sir grigor.......yes. its the qf we were all expecting. ..said hardly anybody anywhere.

 

[Moxie]

goffin vs sir grigor.......yes. its the qf we were all expecting. ..said hardly anybody anywhere.

:lulz2: So, who do you like in that match?

 

[teddytennisfan]

it is a bit like NAVRATILOVA on federer :

'How can you be called the greatest ever if you can't even beat your main rival?"

same as saying federer is the best volleyer or better volleyer or most complete ever..

he just gets beaten by 'less complete players'' anyway.....more often than not..once THEY made their games a BIT ''more complete"

even if STILL ''federer is more complete".

the RESULT is the end story.

 

[teddytennisfan]

:lulz2: So, who do you like in that match?

although i have not yt been persuaded by GRIGOR -- i'd like for him to go forward -- to see if this long -awaited Prince of Tennis can finally realize his considerable talent in a big way.

and it is preferable to see someone with the weapons to take on the ''big boys" majors winners.