Talk About Tennis 2.0

Posted: **Mon Jun 19, 2023 10:51 pm**

I always think of Michael Jordan when this topic comes up. There is no way he can teach anyone to do what he did on court. Meanwhile Steve Kerr, who played with him, watched and learned, like Bajin said, how to do the work.

The same applies with any sports legends. Cristiano Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Messi, and as mentioned Sampras and Federer, none of them can teach what they do.

A person with a Kerr-like personality is rare. That is what I think Roddick was trying to say.

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 9:49 am**

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2023 10:44 pm I have always felt that the super talented make bad coaches.
How can Pete teach that serve? It was completely natural; he could unleash it at will. How about Roger teaching a FH? "Oh, do it THIS way". How? It was something that belonged to him.
The great coaches, I think, have to know, beyond intuition, how to hit a stroke. And for that, you need to have learned it, not be born with it.
Look at Ferrer. I think he would be an excellent coach: he was made in so many ways.

David Samson (former Marlins executive) has oft spoke of how Barry Bonds was the worst hitting coach they had. He couldn't articulate what he " saw" innately that created his gift, and then would get frustrated when others couldn't do it

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 3:37 pm**

Happens in music too .so many good teachers who cannot perform, and conversely, good performers who cannot teach..I have been singularly blessed..my guru is a great singer AND she teaches even a clod like me to sing...

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:43 pm**

Posted: **Wed Jun 21, 2023 12:59 am**

I hope he can play Tokyo in good form and retire there.
Because I see him talking to Thiem and saying "this is tough, you know?"

Posted: **Wed Jun 21, 2023 6:34 pm**

Posted: **Wed Jun 21, 2023 8:00 pm**

He basically "made" the tournament, by going there instead of to Queens.
And I know, he was paid handsomely. But still, Halle would not be tournament it is today.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:23 pm**

Murray left off Wimbledon promotional portrait of rivals and the family is going mad! Pete's also not there - was his rivalry with Becker big enough? Was Becker his biggest rival at Wimbledon? He and Agassi didn't play much there, right?

The painting couldn't be comprehensive, but Murray seems like a glaring omission, all things considered. Someone at the AELTC hates him.

https://www.the-sun.com/sport/8421010/a ... sh-tennis/

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:45 pm**

Pete and Andre played there once, the 99 final. Not much of a rivalry on grass.
I say that Murray should have made the portrait because he is the last Brit to have won it. But, as you say, Pete is not there. Steffi is not there. BORG is not there (!?)
.
It is a promotion for the new generations, because Alcaraz and Sinner, two players that so far have done nothing at Wimbledon (except choke a huge 2-0 lead) are prominently displayed. And NO CURRENT women are there, unless you accept that, at the top of the stairs, Iga and Elena are coming down.
What were they going to do? Paint in 50 players? So, right now, Murray not being in that portrait is a very small story. To me.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 5:51 pm**

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:45 pm Pete and Andre played there once, the 99 final. Not much of a rivalry on grass.
I say that Murray should have made the portrait because he is the last Brit to have won it. But, as you say, Pete is not there. Steffi is not there. BORG is not there (!?)
.
It is a promotion for the new generations, because Alcaraz and Sinner, two players that so far have done nothing at Wimbledon (except choke a huge 2-0 lead) are prominently displayed. And NO CURRENT women are there, unless you accept that, at the top of the stairs, Iga and Elena are coming down.
What were they going to do? Paint in 50 players? So, right now, Murray not being in that portrait is a very small story. To me.

I'm coming around to the Murray-less argument, but he might deserve to be there over Nadal. Both are two-time winners, and I think of them as equal rivals to Novak and Roger at Wimbledon. It would have been just as controversial to leave out Nadal, but at least Murray is in the draw this year.

Borg-Mac omission is weird.

Good observation about Sinner-Alcaraz and the demo.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:38 pm**

The 2008 Wimbledon Men's Final is still consistently voted as the best match ever. There is no way they could leave Rafa and Federer out. I question them making what was a duopoly - Federer and Nadal, into a triumvirate putting Djokovic with them.

Murray carried British tennis for years and I don't understand why he's not included.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:44 pm**

ti-amie wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:38 pm The 2008 Wimbledon Men's Final is still consistently voted as the best match ever. There is no way they could leave Rafa and Federer out. I question them making what was a duopoly - Federer and Nadal, into a triumvirate putting Djokovic with them.

Murray carried British tennis for years and I don't understand why he's not included.

Maybe they knew this would cause a ton of red-hot debate and that was the point of the poster. It's promotional, after all.

Djokovic is 2nd to Roger with 7 titles, and given his current status, I think it would have been worse to leave him out than Murray.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:48 pm**

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:44 pm
ti-amie wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 6:38 pm The 2008 Wimbledon Men's Final is still consistently voted as the best match ever. There is no way they could leave Rafa and Federer out. I question them making what was a duopoly - Federer and Nadal, into a triumvirate putting Djokovic with them.

Murray carried British tennis for years and I don't understand why he's not included.
Maybe they knew this would cause a ton of red-hot debate and that was the point of the poster. It's promotional, after all.

Djokovic is 2nd to Roger with 7 titles, and given his current status, I think it would have been worse to leave him out than Murray.

They could've shown him walking down the stairs but now that I think about it if they put him before them fans will scream. If they put him behind them fans will scream.

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:00 am**

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 4:45 pm BORG is not there (!?)

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 5:51 pm Borg-Mac omission is weird.

Borg & MacEnroe are in the picture. Starting from the top of the stairs the players are Rybakina & Swiatek, Williams Sisters, Becker & Edberg, Borg & MacEnroe, Evert & Navratilova, Djokovic, Federer & Nadal, and Sinner & Alcaraz.

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2023 9:15 pm**

It's The Sun, I'm sure no one is actually fuming in real life.

Anyway, should have just been a portrait of Isner and Mahut

Talk About Tennis 2.0

Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

Re: Tennis Random, Random (On Court)