'22 WTA ATP GS USOpen 8/29 - 9/11

[Cuckoo4Coco]

That argument about players deteriorating as they age makes little sense to me in the context of mental strength. Quite obviously, people have different levels of physical ability. A 20 year old is stronger physically than a 2 year old...
Saying that the game is 95% mental is not saying that there is no physical component, or that the physical element is irrelevant, obviously. It's saying that when physical abilities are very closely matched - as they are at the pro level - the difference and distinction between the players is 95% mental.

The players themselves have said (over various generations) that the main difference between the majority of players in the top 100 is the psychological element - how each player deals with pressure, stress, bad calls, the sun, the wind, the crowd, the media, etc... that is all strictly psychological.
There are a few exceptions here and there - players who possess a rare level of magical physical talent for the game which rises above that of others (Federer, Kyrgios, Arazi, etc.) but these are very few. For all of Kyrgios' natural tennis ability (many would say that he's the most physically talented player on the tour right now, with which I agree) - why is he not #1 in the world? Why has he never come close to being #1 in the world? The very obvious answer is because he is so incredibly weak psychologically.

Lots of tennis commentators - including former players - often say that the game is mostly mental at the pro level.

It has also been my experience over the 40 years I've played and watched tennis that tennis is at least 95% psychological. I've seen lots of evidence of this, and I've experienced it personally many times. I have played in matches where everyone watching agreed that I was the more physically talented player - but which I've lost because I was beaten psychologically (if you want to beat me, give me lots of slow pace balls hit high over the net - I haven't the patience to stand there all day rallying back & forth - I have little patience on the court - I go for winners because I don't like winning through attrition or through my opponent's errors).

So, yes, I am absolutely convinced that tennis is definitely at least 95% mental, or psychological.

I just recently read stuff about Monica Seles and watched a documentary/interview with her. She was very dominant on the tour for quite some time and physically for a period could not be stopped by practically anyone on the tour. Until the day came where she was attacked on court by a crazed fan. This changed her entire mental and psychological outlook as well as having to overcome the physical part of what happened to her. She went through an eating binge disorder and she never really got back to where she was before the attack. Sure she was older as she was trying to return, but it was the struggles with her mental and psychological part that really made it difficult for her to get back to where she once was.

[Deuce]

I just recently read stuff about Monica Seles and watched a documentary/interview with her. She was very dominant on the tour for quite some time and physically for a period could not be stopped by practically anyone on the tour. Until the day came where she was attacked on court by a crazed fan. This changed her entire mental and psychological outlook as well as having to overcome the physical part of what happened to her. She went through an eating binge disorder and she never really got back to where she was before the attack. Sure she was older as she was trying to return, but it was the struggles with her mental and psychological part that really made it difficult for her to get back to where she once was.

^ Yes - that's another good example of what I'm saying. Seles was not the same player after the stabbing as she had been before. The stabbing occurred on a tennis court, of course. Her physical ability to hit a tennis ball did not suddenly disappear or suddenly deteriorate when she was stabbed - but the psychological effect of the attack had a very direct effect on her physical ability.
It's all very directly connected.

[ponchi101]

...

Obviously as we age we physically tire. The really strong players through that age such as Serena, Rafa, Novak, Roger are also very strong mentally so yes it is very important. In Tennis or in any sport I don't think you can be one dimensional in anything, but having a strong mental strength definitely helps everything else within your overall game.

"HELPS" is not the same as "IT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING".
As I say in my piece: if the mental aspect is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, explain to me why David Ferrer was never able to beat Federer. It is not as if David had a reputation as a mental weakling.
And: we recently had an example of a player that has been considered, by many people, as extremely mentally fragile, yet he made the Wimbledon finals. And took one set. So, it does not seem like the evidence is there.
But, again, as I say in my piece, the athletes want to believe that, on top of being physically extremely superior to us mortals, they are also mentally better. They don't want to believe they got lucky in the lottery of DNA.

[Cuckoo4Coco]

...

Obviously as we age we physically tire. The really strong players through that age such as Serena, Rafa, Novak, Roger are also very strong mentally so yes it is very important. In Tennis or in any sport I don't think you can be one dimensional in anything, but having a strong mental strength definitely helps everything else within your overall game.

"HELPS" is not the same as "IT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING".
As I say in my piece: if the mental aspect is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, explain to me why David Ferrer was never able to beat Federer. It is not as if David had a reputation as a mental weakling.
And: we recently had an example of a player that has been considered, by many people, as extremely mentally fragile, yet he made the Wimbledon finals. And took one set. So, it does not seem like the evidence is there.
But, again, as I say in my piece, the athletes want to believe that, on top of being physically extremely superior to us mortals, they are also mentally better. They don't want to believe they got lucky in the lottery of DNA.

Was Roger Federer stronger mentally as well as physically than Ferrer? I don't know, maybe he was.
I think though that the mental game is the most important because it helps all the other aspects of the game. The physical part of the game helps with your ground strokes, stamina and your ability but doesn't really touch the mental part. So in my opinion the mental part of the game is the most important part. The mental part can easily help your ground strokes, stamina and your ability to improve in a match when you are down. That is why I feel it is more important.

[Deuce]

Because Federer obviously is mentally strong, which is one of the requirements of staying at the top for so long. At least as mentally strong as Ferrer. And, as I stated, Federer is one of the few who are exceptionally physically gifted. So he'll beat Ferrer more than Ferrer will beat him.

As for Kyrgios - he obviously found a level of psychological discipline at Wimbledon that was lacking throughout his career until then. He's had other good results, too. Because mental strength is not an absolute with everyone. With the more psychologically fragile, it can come and go.
Based on what I've seen of his psychological condition over the past 7 years or so, I don't expect Kyrgios to maintain a high degree of mental strength for very long. It will always come and go with him. But the direct physical ability does not come and go - it only does so when it is linked with the psychological element.

Anyway - I've explained it all as best I can. It's up to each individual to decide for him/herself how important the psychological element is.

[ashkor87]

SInner is really hitting his stride now..beating Alcaraz on clay! If the court at the USO is anywhere near as fast as last year, I would make him one of the favorites, along with Medvedev and ahead of Kyrgios...certainly ahead of Alcaraz as of now..

[ponchi101]

SInner is really hitting his stride now..beating Alcaraz on clay! If the court at the USO is anywhere near as fast as last year, I would make him one of the favorites, along with Medvedev and ahead of Kyrgios...certainly ahead of Alcaraz as of now..

He has made it clear that he prefers fast courts, so at the moment, and based solely on this victory, I will move him ahead of Carlitos.
But he will be a factor. I said this before: if he has the proper frame of mind after losing that two sets lead to Djokovic (satisfied with the effort, unhappy about the end result) he could go very far.
As I don't see Medvedev repeating, we may have a new champ.

[Cuckoo4Coco]

I am hoping Taylor Fritz can pull off something special at the US Open this year, but Sinner will definitely be someone to watch.

[ponchi101]

Right now:
At the top, Medvedev because he is the defending champion and he likes the courts. And Rafa because he is Rafa.
And an entire cast of new guys right below, able to win it. Let's remember that the USO is the slam where knew champions have been crowned in the last two years.

[Cuckoo4Coco]

Right now:
At the top, Medvedev because he is the defending champion and he likes the courts. And Rafa because he is Rafa.
And an entire cast of new guys right below, able to win it. Let's remember that the USO is the slam where knew champions have been crowned in the last two years.

Would you dare to say OTHER?

[ponchi101]

Right now:
At the top, Medvedev because he is the defending champion and he likes the courts. And Rafa because he is Rafa.
And an entire cast of new guys right below, able to win it. Let's remember that the USO is the slam where knew champions have been crowned in the last two years.

Would you dare to say OTHER?

Not in the men's. The winner will come out of a small group. There are only 6, 7 guys that could win it.
For example, Tsitsipas is not being talked about, as is correct. But a couple of good showings at Cincy/Canada and he could get in the conversation. I am, right now, saying Carlitos will do well, but is nowhere near a real chance of winning it.
The week before, after the two MS1000's, we will have better data. I will include OTHER as the #10 pick in the poll, but I will not be surprised if nobody takes him.
In the women's, I expect at least 30% of us picking OTHER.

[meganfernandez]

Right now:
At the top, Medvedev because he is the defending champion and he likes the courts. And Rafa because he is Rafa.
And an entire cast of new guys right below, able to win it. Let's remember that the USO is the slam where knew champions have been crowned in the last two years.

Yeah, but those 2 new champs had been to Slam finals before. They had proven themselves. The other contenders this year have mustered like one Slam semi between them (without googling to be sure). I'm taking Rafa unless he looks to be very hurt in the tune-ups.

[Cuckoo4Coco]

Right now:
At the top, Medvedev because he is the defending champion and he likes the courts. And Rafa because he is Rafa.
And an entire cast of new guys right below, able to win it. Let's remember that the USO is the slam where knew champions have been crowned in the last two years.

Would you dare to say OTHER?

Not in the men's. The winner will come out of a small group. There are only 6, 7 guys that could win it.
For example, Tsitsipas is not being talked about, as is correct. But a couple of good showings at Cincy/Canada and he could get in the conversation. I am, right now, saying Carlitos will do well, but is nowhere near a real chance of winning it.
The week before, after the two MS1000's, we will have better data. I will include OTHER as the #10 pick in the poll, but I will not be surprised if nobody takes him.
In the women's, I expect at least 30% of us picking OTHER.

If Taylor Fritz is in the mix of the OTHERS, I am going with the OTHERS.

[ashkor87]

Too early ..don't know how the court will play..more like SJ or more like DC? Last year was faster even than SJ..I will not venture a prediction till I see the first day with my own eyes, since news channels don't seem capable of knowing the difference...

[ashkor87]

I am certainly going to enjoy watching SanJose and Toronto and Cinci but, as usual, history shows that winning any of those doesn't mean much for your prospects at the USO.. it takes the class of Serena to win San Jose and the USO in the same year..Andreescu is one of the really few people who have gone on to win the USO after winning Rogers...so no point getting too excited if one of my favs like Rybakina or Andreescu or Raducanu or Leylah wins one of these warm-up events. ..I would hope they don't,. Peaking too early is a real thing ...

I don’t look at just the winners for predictive value. I look at who plays well, win or lose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, me too..my first line above.. I agree doing well is even more important than winning in these warm-up events