Legends Discuss Djokovic, Federer & Nadal At US Open

[tented]

Becker, Lendl, McEnroe, and Wilander Discuss Djokovic, Federer & Nadal At US Open

The video is rather long (43 minutes), but well worth it.

 

[El Dude]

Great listen, thanks. Lots of interesting points. I really enjoyed how different their personalities are, and how they enhance rather than cancel each other out. Mac is a bit of the court jester, while Wilander the quite, nice guy who got a bit lost in the mix, but didn't seem to mind; Boris is rather emotional and choleric, and Lendl the somewhat pompous but wise, regal king. I thought Mac was going to dominate the conversation, but Lendl actually seemed to be the leading voice that they deferred to.

I loved the bit about them talking about which current players they think they would have taken a similar approach to. Mac said Shapovalov, which at first i didn't see but then made a kind of sense; Ivan said somewhat similar to Novak's approach - especially in not giving anything away, but more focused on power than movement; Becker said, interestingly, Kyrgios - which like Mac/Shapo I didn't quite see at first but then made sense. I think Mats said Murray. Interesting that no one said Roger, but Mac drew a connection between Laver and Federer.

A very crucial point: At 20:48 Becker talks about the inability of young players to construct points, that they come in hitting hard and that's about it, and that's what keeps them from challenging the Big Three.

Lots of talk about "The Big Question": When will the young guys take the reins from the Big Three. No hard conclusions. I found it interesting, the talk around what the Semifinals used to mean: that if you were a top player and didn't reach the SF, it was a bad tournament. I think that is still true today, but the problem is the young guys aren't even making the SFs.

Becker said he really hopes to see it change within the next 18 months, while Lendl said he's been hoping for two years.

 

[El Dude]

One more thing. I think something similar is occuring in tennis as has been occuring in baseball. In baseball, there's been a huge influence from analytics and deep statistical analysis, which has basically shown that over the course of a season, it is better to try to get on base, hit for power and take walks, even if it means more strikeouts and lower batting averages, and don't steal bases as it does more harm than good. A lot of people, including myself, feel that this has led to a less interesting and diverse game, or "station to station" baseball: get on base, wait to be driven in, but don't be aggressive on the base paths. They call this "three true outcomes": home runs, strikeouts, walks.

I think something similar has happened in tennis, which has led to the loss of diversity and certain subtle skills. They briefly talked about Roger's serve placement, how it stands out as rare and unique in today's game, or the point I mentioned that Becker made about point construction. I think all types of play are still there, but it has simmered down to power, baselining, and attrition, with less finesse, serve and volley, etc.

I'm not sure what the solution is, except that to be a truly elite player you have to be able to do everything. The Big Three can draw upon finesse and less utilized aspects of the game; they can construct points; the younger guys, and second tier types of the past decade, didn't have that full bag of tricks.

But it is interesting to note that in both games, certain developments that have led to some of the best players ever have also diminished the artistry of the sport. Its like the gun over the sword, or the famous scene from Indiana Jones: no matter how impressively beautiful that man's swordsmanship was, all Indie had to do was pull his gun out and shoot him (evidently that scene was improvised by Harrison Ford; he was supposed to grab a sword and fight him hand to hand).

 

[brokenshoelace]

That was an interesting listen. I have a looooooooot of gripes with many former players in terms of bad analysis and the occasional insane general narratives every now and then, but I must say one thing that tennis doesn't suffer from quite as much compared to other sports, it's the bitter old man syndrome. Aside from former players clamoring for serve and volley, there isn't a lot of "in my days" talking points compared to say, the NBA where it's at its most egregious.

I guess this is in large part due to the current top players being much more successful than most of the past greats, so it's a bit hard for those old guys to talk shit, but I think they, for the most part, enjoy and respect these guys (it's hard not to anyway), sometimes to a fault (Mac and Wilander can be particularly crazy on commentary, especially the former).

 

[Ricardo]

tennis is by and large, a thinking man's game. sports like basketball it's easy for former greats to talk like 'its all about me'. in comparison, Lendl and Becker have coached current players. They have updated themselves about what qualities the current players have, Edberg happily admitted that he'd have to change his serve and volley game if he has to play now. Former tennis players are generally more unassuming, as the sport required more analytical abilities and level headedness to excel, rather than simplistic athletic abilities.

 

[tented]

Part 2:



I haven’t watched this part yet, but if it’s like the first one, it’s worth watching.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Glad to see that they all agree that Nadal is the GOAT.