PHYSICAL - The buzz word in tennis.

Yep some of us have been talking about this for years but it's clearly in everybody's mouth nowadays. Courier, Djokovic, Murray, Nadal all talk about it to describe their games. That's what it's all about. There is no room for talent. We however saw that when 2 physical players are toe to toes Djoko is the mentally strongest thus far. THat's all we can say and I suspect the reason is that he uses less power than his opponents and can therefore produce easier winners when needed. That's what makes him the best for now.

They are all talking about great the macth was...but frankly as much as the physical side is crazy and "unbelievable" I am not impressed by the shotmaking of those players.

No one's forcing you to watch !

I'd love to see a stat of the position of the ball during rallies. Half the time they were playing around the T.

I admire their endurance, and Djokovics mental strength is tremendous. It will be fascinating to see whether Nadal can beat him after this. As I've said elsewhere the pressure on Nadal will now be immense; lose this and he has no hope.

More like Buzzkill!!

i think the match overall was boring. I could never watch a match like that all along.

Finally, I see you agree with me that we are in a rather average era in term of quality of tennis.

May I suggest to those who are not yet convinced to watch:

Courier - Agassi: RG 1991 final on youtube?

Obviously what defines a great match is in the eyes of the beholder, but I thought it was fantastic... and i thought the US open final (another match i've heard was just a physical battle) was great too!

Personally, variety of shot and movement and 25+ rallies is just as if not more entertaining than someone blasting winners and rallies under 5 shots. Physicality is not something to be ashamed of in my opinion.

Each to their own obviously, but that's the kind of tennis i like to watch. Well done to Novak and Andy.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:Finally, I see you agree with me that we are in a rather average era in term of quality of tennis.

May I suggest to those who are not yet convinced to watch:

Courier - Agassi: RG 1991 final on youtube?

Yes. I would just distingish eras according to what there were strong at. I have always said shotmaking wise, this era is poor at the top (bar Federer of course) even if it is the physically strongest era.
As good as Agassi was he would not stand a chance today. That is the sad fact cause his talent would simply play too small a part.

Danny_1982 wrote:Obviously what defines a great match is in the eyes of the beholder, but I thought it was fantastic... and i thought the US open final (another match i've heard was just a physical battle) was great too!

Personally, variety of shot and movement and 25+ rallies is just as if not more entertaining than someone blasting winners and rallies under 5 shots. Physicality is not something to be ashamed of in my opinion.

Each to their own obviously, but that's the kind of tennis i like to watch. Well done to Novak and Andy.

Would you spend another 5h on youtube to watch it again?

I'd watch it again, definitely! And if the final produces tennis like that, or like the 3rd set in the US open final, I'll be very happy.

You have different taste to me, that's fine.

Sounds like you don't like matches like this, which makes me wonder why you watch them?

Danny_1982 wrote:I'd watch it again, definitely! And if the final produces tennis like that, or like the 3rd set in the US open final, I'll be very happy.

You have different taste to me, that's fine.

Sounds like you don't like matches like this, which makes me wonder why you watch them?

Awful riposte.

It is legitimate to condemn something, especially if you've watched tennis for decades and have a seasoned palate. The extension of your point is that negative comment is unacceptable.

I'm not being negative! It's a genuine question.

If I don't enjoy something I turn it off.

I apologise to Tenez if you think I was condemning your taste, I wasn't.

As I said, each to their own. I haven't criticised anyone's taste, just stated that mine is different.