Piece of trivia

Talk and announcements about the big 4 tournaments
ashkor87 India
Posts: 4574
Joined: Wed May 26, 2021 6:18 am
Location: India
Has thanked: 2317 times
Been thanked: 813 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#16

Post by ashkor87 »

And Niemenen! What happened to him?
ashkor87 India
Posts: 4574
Joined: Wed May 26, 2021 6:18 am
Location: India
Has thanked: 2317 times
Been thanked: 813 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#17

Post by ashkor87 »

One more unique thing about W is that there are hardly any tournaments to get practice..so to win W you need class? Just good form and momentum will not do..?
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14718
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3855 times
Been thanked: 5561 times
Contact:

Re: Piece of trivia

#18

Post by ponchi101 »

very hard to say. Pete won it seven times with almost no preparation ever, Borg won it five going almost straight from RG. Roger has been the opposite, winning Halle almost always, Serena has done it with no preparation.
It is an odd tournament, by now.
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
ashkor87 India
Posts: 4574
Joined: Wed May 26, 2021 6:18 am
Location: India
Has thanked: 2317 times
Been thanked: 813 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#19

Post by ashkor87 »

Also, there aren't enough grass tournaments for anyone to make a living as a grass court specialist..a clay court specialist is viable, and might even go to the finals or win RG..
ashkor87 India
Posts: 4574
Joined: Wed May 26, 2021 6:18 am
Location: India
Has thanked: 2317 times
Been thanked: 813 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#20

Post by ashkor87 »

ponchi101 wrote: Thu Dec 16, 2021 7:34 pm very hard to say. Pete won it seven times with almost no preparation ever, Borg won it five going almost straight from RG. Roger has been the opposite, winning Halle almost always, Serena has done it with no preparation.
It is an odd tournament, by now.
True but it doesn't really explain why nobody other than great players seems to be able to win W..
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14718
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3855 times
Been thanked: 5561 times
Contact:

Re: Piece of trivia

#21

Post by ponchi101 »

Isn't that sort of circular? You win W, you are a great player. You are a great player, you win W.
In the open era, and even counting Jan Kodes (who won a RG too), there have been only 4 winners at Wimbledon that won no other slam: Cash, Stich, Krajicek and Ivanisevic. They all made other slam finals, and only Goran made them only at W. At the USO, you now have: Medvedev, Thiem, Cilic, Delpo and Roddick. All have made other finals, with Delpo making it twice to the USO.
W and the USO are very similar in that aspect. Only the best make it, but that is, again, circular. It is also very similar for the women. At W, only three one time winners that never won anywhere else: Martinez, Novotna and Bartoli. At the USO right now we have a few one timers: Sabatini, Stosur, Penetta, Stephens, Bianca and Raducanu, and the last two are far from over.
Plus Wimbledon cultivates that image. I wonder if they would like more grass court tournaments before theirs. They would not be competition, but they like being "exclusive".
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
ashkor87 India
Posts: 4574
Joined: Wed May 26, 2021 6:18 am
Location: India
Has thanked: 2317 times
Been thanked: 813 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#22

Post by ashkor87 »

ponchi101 wrote: Fri Dec 17, 2021 3:12 pm Isn't that sort of circular? You win W, you are a great player. You are a great player, you win W.
In the open era, and even counting Jan Kodes (who won a RG too), there have been only 4 winners at Wimbledon that won no other slam: Cash, Stich, Krajicek and Ivanisevic. They all made other slam finals, and only Goran made them only at W. At the USO, you now have: Medvedev, Thiem, Cilic, Delpo and Roddick. All have made other finals, with Delpo making it twice to the USO.
W and the USO are very similar in that aspect. Only the best make it, but that is, again, circular. It is also very similar for the women. At W, only three one time winners that never won anywhere else: Martinez, Novotna and Bartoli. At the USO right now we have a few one timers: Sabatini, Stosur, Penetta, Stephens, Bianca and Raducanu, and the last two are far from over.
Plus Wimbledon cultivates that image. I wonder if they would like more grass court tournaments before theirs. They would not be competition, but they like being "exclusive".
No, what I am saying is - if you win multiple majors, you are a great player..that is not circular, it is an independent definition.
User avatar
mick1303 Ukraine
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:39 pm
Location: Ukraine
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 339 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#23

Post by mick1303 »

I have a theory that the factor affecting "random" winners is the interval between Slams. Wimbledon has so much less of them because of the short turnaround. Only elite players can handle this.
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14718
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3855 times
Been thanked: 5561 times
Contact:

Re: Piece of trivia

#24

Post by ponchi101 »

Yes, but not my preferred idea. I say very few players really know how to play on grass, while a lot are perfectly able to play on clay.
To me, for ages, the idea was that big servers would always win W. The list does not support that: Connors, Borg, Agassi, Rafa and Novak are not big servers (but they were smart servers). The one ability that ALL W winners have is their foot work. They are very good but also light on their feet. Rafter could not win it because he was very fast and had great footwork, but his strides where "heavy" meaning, he would plant too hard. His split coming to the net was superb on a hard court, but in grass, it would dig him in.
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
ashkor87 India
Posts: 4574
Joined: Wed May 26, 2021 6:18 am
Location: India
Has thanked: 2317 times
Been thanked: 813 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#25

Post by ashkor87 »

ponchi101 wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:36 pm Yes, but not my preferred idea. I say very few players really know how to play on grass, while a lot are perfectly able to play on clay.
To me, for ages, the idea was that big servers would always win W. The list does not support that: Connors, Borg, Agassi, Rafa and Novak are not big servers (but they were smart servers). The one ability that ALL W winners have is their foot work. They are very good but also light on their feet. Rafter could not win it because he was very fast and had great footwork, but his strides where "heavy" meaning, he would plant too hard. His split coming to the net was superb on a hard court, but in grass, it would dig him in.
Yes, the way you have to move on grass is very different from how you have to move anywhere else.. but it doesn't really explain, I think, why some random player who is a good grass mover cannot win this and never win anything else..in fact if this theory is correct, we should have even more players who can win one Wimbledon and nothing else? I am thinking Rybarikova, for instance..she floated like a wraith on the grass...
User avatar
mick1303 Ukraine
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:39 pm
Location: Ukraine
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 339 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#26

Post by mick1303 »

These things rarely depend on one single reason but rather on the combination of them. Rarity of grass, short turnaround, maybe something else that we can't pinpoint at the moment. Movement is extremely important but it can't solve all problems if there are glaring deficiencies in the game (comparing to top players). On the other hand, the relative deficiency in movement can be compensated. Becker was good mover but far from archetypal grass mover (how many of his "flights" were the results of being out of position?). Davenport was below average mover. So were Sharapova and Kvitova.
jazzyg United States of America
Posts: 890
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:01 am
Location: New Orleans
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#27

Post by jazzyg »

Krajicek won Wimbledon in 1996 and never won another slam or even reached a slam final before or after.
ptmcmahon Canada
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2020 6:02 pm
Location: Halifax, NS Canada
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 496 times

Re: Piece of trivia

#28

Post by ptmcmahon »

Only even reached one semi.
:steven:
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14718
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3855 times
Been thanked: 5561 times
Contact:

Re: Piece of trivia

#29

Post by ponchi101 »

He also had at least 8 major injuries in his career. He makes Phillipousis or Delpo look like the stalwarts of endurance.
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests