Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[ponchi101]

I said probably, and you know I am hoping a major jinx Nothing would make me happier than him losing.
But he looks very solid at the moment.
If you tell me what to pick, 75% chance of Nadal winning, or 100% chance of Novak losing, well, Rafa, you're on your own.

[ashkor87]

Yes. There is something that I don't like about that decision. It sort of punishes more people than what would seem fair.
Now, let's see how many players do not go to Wimbledon. Tournaments outside of the UK will have the longest entry list in all their history, but Wimbledon will be immune to this. Novak especially could not care less about the points. Probably gunning for 22, he would go even if it meant losing all his ATP points.

But will it count as 22?! I bet he won't go..solidarity!!Djokovic is a man of principle, which is something many people don't give him credit for..you may agree with him or not but one must admire his spine...!

[Deuce]

From another thread, but my question is more suited to this thread...

Am happy to see Sania playing and doing consistently well in doubles...the best female player India ever produced...

Who's the best MALE player India has ever produced?

Vijay Amritraj?
Ramesh Krishnan?
Leander Paes?
Mahesh Bhupathi?

[ashkor87]

Ramanathan Krishnan, Ramesh' father

[Deuce]

Ramanathan Krishnan, Ramesh' father

^ Before my time, but an interesting answer.

[ashkor87]

He was a contemporary of Laver and Fraser, pioneer of the touch game.beautiful to watch...

[the Moz]

I go with Paes

[ponchi101]

Yes. There is something that I don't like about that decision. It sort of punishes more people than what would seem fair.
Now, let's see how many players do not go to Wimbledon. Tournaments outside of the UK will have the longest entry list in all their history, but Wimbledon will be immune to this. Novak especially could not care less about the points. Probably gunning for 22, he would go even if it meant losing all his ATP points.

But will it count as 22?! I bet he won't go..solidarity!!Djokovic is a man of principle, which is something many people don't give him credit for..you may agree with him or not but one must admire his spine...!

I am not sure if you are joking, or the sarcasm is too exquisitely tuned, or you suffer from that same disease I suffer from, emoji-challenged.
But I say there is no way he does not go. The ATP can say he will get all his ranking points taken off and he would still go.

[Deuce]

Yes. There is something that I don't like about that decision. It sort of punishes more people than what would seem fair.
Now, let's see how many players do not go to Wimbledon. Tournaments outside of the UK will have the longest entry list in all their history, but Wimbledon will be immune to this. Novak especially could not care less about the points. Probably gunning for 22, he would go even if it meant losing all his ATP points.

But will it count as 22?! I bet he won't go..solidarity!!Djokovic is a man of principle, which is something many people don't give him credit for..you may agree with him or not but one must admire his spine...!

I am not sure if you are joking, or the sarcasm is too exquisitely tuned, or you suffer from that same disease I suffer from, emoji-challenged.
But I say there is no way he does not go. The ATP can say he will get all his ranking points taken off and he would still go.

But it is a very intriguing question about whether Wimbledon would count as #21 (or #22 or #23 for Djokovic or Nadal should one of them win this Roland Garros) if some of the top players are not at Wimbledon - whether through the unfair ban, or through boycott, or through disinterest because of no points being awarded.
It might turn out to be the biggest asterisk in the book...

[ti-amie]

FORMER SUCCESSFUL MENTOR TO JUSTINE HENIN, CARLOS RODRIGUEZ IS STRUGGLING TO GET EXCITED ABOUT THE CURRENT WOMEN'S TOUR ON THE EVE OF THE ROLAND-GARROS TOURNAMENT.

Sitting on the terrace of the Justine Henin Academy, Carlos Rodriguez's eyes sparkle and he offers a passionate speech when talking about tennis. The little yellow ball, the former successful coach of the Rochefortoise, has it in his blood. This passion, which he has been trying to instil in young people since his return to Belgium, largely explains his rise to the top of world tennis. An outstanding technician who has enabled Justine Henin to measure up to girls who are bigger and more powerful than her, the Belgian-Argentinian still follows the women's circuit very closely. A circuit where, however, he no longer finds himself. A circuit where he sees girls wasting their talent because they offer a stereotypical tennis. Why is that? He tries to explain it to us, to you, before the bell rings for the 2022 edition of Roland Garros.

Mr. Carlos Rodriguez, how do you see women's tennis today?

"Not very happy. Barty's departure has taken a toll on my morale. I'm a lover of the game and with all due respect to the girls, the athletes, who are currently on the tour, I don't understand what they are playing at. It's hard for me to see in a WTA match what the tactics are and what the strategic approach is to create something. It's a waste because I see that the players are able to offer more than what they show. We limit ourselves to very simple things; sometimes it looks like arm wrestling. It's a shame to limit women's tennis to that. When you see someone like Barty playing tennis, she doesn't just "hit the ball", you think that's going to create a buzz. With her leaving, I wonder what the future will be like."

Is that where the coach has to step in?

"I went back to the tour for two months and realised that the coach has become an accessory and not the cornerstone of the relationship with the player. Often the coach doesn't have much to say. There are so many people around the players that in the end you don't know who is doing what. Not to mention the parents, who are once coaches, once physiotherapists, and then become psychologists. It's all a big mess. And the coach is badly taken because he is paid by the player or her parents and he can't say much.

Wasn't that the case on the tour when you were coaching Justine Henin?

"No, because there was a respect for the coach that doesn't exist today. When the coach spoke, we listened. Today, we don't care and if it's not him, we'll take someone else. We pay him badly, we ask him to go to the four corners of the world and when we don't feel like it anymore, we throw him out overnight. This didn't happen as much before and now it's commonplace.

In Justine's time, do you think there was more tennis on the circuit?

"There's no question about it. The level of the top 10 twenty years ago is ten times higher than the top 10 today. If you go back and look at a French Open or Wimbledon draw from 2001, 2002 or 2003, you'll find seven or eight great champions in the last 16. Now it's a different player who wins every Grand Slam and it's not especially a top 10 player. That's not good. We hear that the general level of players has improved. That's not true. Because the top 10 are playing less well and are more irregular and all the players are playing the same way, you think that the top 50 have come closer to the top 10. But in fact, the opposite is true. The top 10 has moved closer to the top 50. That's what happened; we have to stop lying to ourselves. I'm not judging this situation, it's just an observation."

Do you still watch WTA matches?

"Very little. I watch the matches of the girl who trains at Justine's Academy, Clara Tauson, in whom I have a lot of faith. Olivier (Editor's note: Jeunehomme) is in charge of her and I help her a little bit. I also watch matches for my work. But I'm not interested because I don't see anything that affects me. There are some interesting young players in terms of creativity and real tennis. But I realise that during their training, doors are closed to them and they are directed towards a stereotyped game. You hit hard once, I hit hard twice. For me, that's not the right way to look at it. Men's tennis, on the other hand, is much more interesting. I love it."

Do you see a girl being able to dominate the tour?

"I feel like it's going to be very random. It goes beyond just tennis. The girls who are currently in the top spots in the world are so surrounded that they are cut off. They don't have charisma or personality. Back then, when Justine, Kim or the Williams sisters spoke, we listened. Today, do you see the same thing? We no longer identify with the best players on the circuit. The people around these players have taken up so much space since their childhood that they are vulnerable. The media exposure is huge and the protection even more so. This creates an explosive cocktail. The best example is Osaka."

Do you understand that this pressure is immense and that players crack?

"Of course I do. I feel sorry for the girls who are playing now. They are facing a real pain."

In your opinion, have girls like Leylah Fernandez, Emma Raducanu or Cori Gauff finished their training?

"Some of them had the misfortune to arrive too quickly, too early at a very high level. And they didn't have the environment, the training and the experience to support such a cataclysm in their lives. I'm in a good position to talk about this because when I inherited Li Na after she won the French Open, it was the same story. I had to help her out of that. When a player wins a Grand Slam but she doesn't know how she did it, that's a big problem. It's impossible for her to have something clear and precise to build on. You are working on quicksand. Raducanu and Fernandez know this problem. I hope I'm wrong but I think it could be a long and painful journey for both players."

If you had to put a coin on one player to win the French Open, who would it be placed on?

SWIATEK. She is young, plays well and has digested her first Grand Slam win at Roland Garros in 2020. Maybe that win came too early for her, so I say she's digested it now. The Pole has the most weapons in her arsenal to win in Paris. On top of that, she's very comfortable on clay."

When you think of the French Open, what is the first thing that comes to mind?

"Three words associated: clay, Justine and Carlos. Until I was 18, I only played on clay. In Argentina, there were no other surfaces. And the best surface for Justine is clay. And it's in Paris that Justine has won the most Grand Slam titles."

You are always associated with women's tennis but you also like men's tennis?"

Of course I do. More than women's tennis. But in life, people often label you. You have to know that at the beginning of my career, I was coaching men. Dick Norman, for example, was my player at the beginning and I took him all the way to the last 16 at Wimbledon. Even though I wasn't following him anymore, we worked in secret the day before he left for Wimbledon. I also worked with players from the AFT: Olivier Rochus and Réginald Willems for example. And I can tell you that it is easier to coach boys than girls. In terms of managing emotions, it's less complicated."

Given your values, you must surely appreciate a player like Rafael Nadal?

"When people ask me who I think is the greatest player in the history of tennis, I can't give one name, I have to give two: Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. They are two champions with great human values. They are two champions in all the dimensions in which we expect them to be champions. And one would never have been as good without the other. They have left their mark on tennis forever. In terms of tennis, they are diametrically opposed, but they share the same human values.

Justine will be present at Roland Garros as a consultant. How do you find her in this role?

"Extraordinary. She is very strong. It's true that I'm not objective but she has a gift. She always finds the right tone, the right words and she sees things very clearly. Her analyses are also very spontaneous. And when she conducts interviews, I find her to be kind to the players. It's impressive and she shows her knowledge of tennis. When we prepared a match with Justine, it was like a game of chess. The power was not in our camp and we had to find other weapons to win. We were looking for the weakness in the opponent's game, where no one could see it. And when we found it, even if it was small, we tried to find a way to get through it again and again. That was the best part of our job."

In addition to Dominique Monami, who has been providing us with his sharp and interesting analyses for several months, you will be able to benefit from the expert eye of Carlos Rodriguez from the start of the French Open. During the French internationals, the 58-year-old Belgian-Argentinian, who has been the new sports director of the Justine Henin Academy for a little over a year, will give his opinion and explanations on the future highlights of the Paris Grand Slam. It's hard to find a better man in the Belgian tennis microcosm when you know his track record and the excellence of his work on the courts for several decades.

https://www.dhnet.be/sports/tennis/carl ... riNuEAj0HQ

I didn't do the translation. Thanks to @Pigam

[Deuce]

FORMER SUCCESSFUL MENTOR TO JUSTINE HENIN, CARLOS RODRIGUEZ IS STRUGGLING TO GET EXCITED ABOUT THE CURRENT WOMEN'S TOUR ON THE EVE OF THE ROLAND-GARROS TOURNAMENT.

In your opinion, have girls like Leylah Fernandez, Emma Raducanu or Cori Gauff finished their training?

"Some of them had the misfortune to arrive too quickly, too early at a very high level. And they didn't have the environment, the training and the experience to support such a cataclysm in their lives. I'm in a good position to talk about this because when I inherited Li Na after she won the French Open, it was the same story. I had to help her out of that. When a player wins a Grand Slam but she doesn't know how she did it, that's a big problem. It's impossible for her to have something clear and precise to build on. You are working on quicksand. Raducanu and Fernandez know this problem. I hope I'm wrong but I think it could be a long and painful journey for both players."

https://www.dhnet.be/sports/tennis/carl ... riNuEAj0HQ

I agree with most of that part ^... I've said several times that I feel that Gauff's gradual trajectory to the top 20 will serve her much better and prove more beneficial than will Leylah's and Emma's very sudden and rapid ascension.
And I agree with his reasoning.

But for the first part of the interview, where he talks badly about the state and quality of the current WTA, and complains that coaches today are not as 'revered' as coaches in the past... well, I think he's guilty of 'romanticizing' the Henin era as well as his own accomplishments.
I think he's blowing his own horn too loudly.

As for the top 10 women players being of higher quality twenty years ago than today... that's debatable. It may be true - but the quality twenty years ago was certainly not '10 times higher than it is today'.
There is undeniably more parity in the WTA today than there was back then - and I think that makes for a more enjoyable 'product' for the vast majority of people - even if the quality is slightly less (if it is).

I do, however agree with what he says about the media exposure being too much today, and that it can easily be overwhelming for some players...
And I agree with him saying that players today have too many people around them. It seems that every player's 'team' is forever growing. Of course, the players making more money today has a lot to do with this, as they have more money to hire more people than players of the past did. But it's overkill.

With all of his talk comparing today's tennis to the past, it's shocking that he didn't mention that the number of in-match 'retirements' and withdrawals and Medical Time-Outs is so much higher today than it was in the past. So much so that it slaps the people who remember the past in the face...

[ashkor87]

I go with Paes

Great doubles player certainly but so was Krishnan..

[ashkor87]

I always wonder why players sit down at changeovers..don't they cool off too much? In the old days (mid 70s ) players just strolled over to the other side and kept playing. I am not in this league but whenever I play a tournament, I never sit down..find it too hard to get going again....what is the experience of other folks here? Who play competitively at some level?

[Deuce]

I always wonder why players sit down at changeovers..don't they cool off too much? In the old days (mid 70s ) players just strolled over to the other side and kept playing. I am not in this league but whenever I play a tournament, I never sit down..find it too hard to get going again....what is the experience of other folks here? Who play competitively at some level?

I assume that the act of sitting makes it easier for most players to relax/decompress/think without losing their focus.
Every once in a while, we see a player not sit down on changeovers. To each their own - whatever works for them.

When I play tournaments - which is rare these days - sometimes I sit, and sometimes I don't. Generally, I tend to sit when I feel I need to relax/decompress/think, and I don't sit when I'm I'm playing well and full of intensity and want to keep it at that level.

[ponchi101]

Depends on the level and quality of play. If you are a 3.0, don't sit. You are really not hitting or running that hard.
At 5.0, and over 45 yo, yes, sit a little bit. That bandana may be wet.
At the pro level, sit. You are soaked, the match is going to be a long one, and you need to think of what is going on.