Topic: Hose Higueras' impact

[monstertruck]

An interesting link describing one person's view of Fed's 'dilemma'.
http://blog.webtennis.net/

[pawan89]

An interesting link describing one person's view of Fed's 'dilemma'.
http://blog.webtennis.net/

good article monster. I agree to an extent. To a certain extent the baseline way is "the way" to win matches today. But perhaps, perhaps its not a bad idea to really throw in a new level. It is definitely not easy, but the great ones have to find a way to do it and inspire the younger generation

Hey, I wish Fed would use all of the different grips I know he has available to him.  I've always said that he's the best guy on the planet because he has so many grips available to him.  Unfortunately, we're not seeing him use them when it's appropriate to try and "change a losing game".

I'm telling you, if we continue to teach and promote a Nadal style of play, we're going to kill off this game somewhere down the road.

I've seen way too many young adults who were taught baseline only strategies give up tennis in their mid 20s and early 30s because that style just isn't any fun or because of the injuries suffered from that style.  As juniors, tennis was less about "fun" and more about pure winning.

And as they got older, the young adults' perception of trying to convert to an "all-court" style of play using lots of different grips was just to big of an ordeal to have to face.

I'm not promoting total doom and gloom, but I am saying that we have to demand something different from our teaching pros at least.

[Alison2006]

better stop responding to that person.......he gets too protective on federer whenever we say something straight on federer.......

  Hit the nail on the head 

[falcon]

An interesting link describing one person's view of Fed's 'dilemma'.
http://blog.webtennis.net/

An excellent insight indeed...thanks...
Yet I don't see what Fed would have done to change the scoreline indeed sice most of his approach shots as you've mentioned were not positioned well which meant that his volleys landed outside the service box thus giving Rafa the slightest opportunity of going for passes though the balls stayed very low..Rafa pounced on those balls since they weren't inside the service box..that's where I say that better volleying skills are needed for Fed since it'll go a long way in improving his grass court game too.

[TennisVeritas]

Why do you think that i'm trying to put federer down? As a matter of fact i've given him due respect when its needed...that is i've gone on to say that Fed would have won the RG twice had it not been for Nadal..its fair enough...but what else do you want me to say? I think i've been quite respectful of Federer and I haven't once told anything wrong about him in this thread...what makes you think that guys like Shanker and I are trying to say? All we are telling is how sampras would have fared against rafa..sure rafa is the best clay courter ever no doubt about it just that Sampras would have mixed things up had he been in Federer's place this year..I think that's reasonable..Just that Federer's volleying skills aren't as good as those in the 90's..Sampras, Rafter etc..Sampras was a better volleyer..you have to accept that..and no matter what, sampras would have tried to play a more complete net game had he been in the finals on Sunday..not whether he would win against Rafa..at the rate rafa is going ..no one can beat rafa even in the coming few years. But I agree with the fact that Sampras never took the french as seriously as Fed is taking it.
And about Jose's role on hard courts..i'm wise enough to know that jose joined him only in Estoril..I was talking about the dip in Fed's performance this year on ALL COURTS and the impact Jose would have on the coming tournaments WHICH ARE NOT CLAY. I think that's clear enough...all I'm trying to say is jose's impact on Federer..I did not start this thread to insult fed in any way...I'm a true tennis fan and I give due credit to Roger where its due.I respect and appreciate him as a player and again I say that I haven't told anything demeaning him.

There's no point arguing with you tennisveritas..because I've already highlighted the fact that i appreciate Fed as player..if he goes on to win more GS kudos to him..but any small statement and you take it out of context..what else can I say? If your opinion is of that sort...that's your problem..I only say that my true love is only tennis and I appreciate Fed's game...and I haven't forgotten what he has done because a true lover of the game never forgets a dedicated player..he is dedicated to the game..how can I hate him?He is a fantastic player how can I hate him? He has popularised the game so much..how canI hate him? Yet you form your opinions...sad very sad.And if I see champions falling below the high standards they themselves have set..i am the first person to feel sorry for them...but should I feel sorry for Fed? No because he has achieved great heights in a noble sport...now tell me how can I hate him? You know who I hate in tennis? Kournikova and likes of her who give up tennis for other popular stuff...how on earth can I hate him?

You wrote: "because I've already highlighted the fact that i appreciate Fed as player" No you are not (even if you are not at the same Mr. shankar21's low level, I should say)..

Why? But simply because you are here day after day, post after post telling us a TRUE STATEMENT AND THEN ACCEPTING JUST THE CONTRARY. THE TRUE STATEMENT IS CLEARLY THIS: "Rafa is one of the greatest clay court specialist of the open era"

So, on one side you are nominating Rafa as being the greatest clay court of the open era, to be the most talented genius out there on that surface (AND I AGREE WITH: NO DOUBT ON THAT)..

BUT THIS NOMINATION IS BASED ON WHAT: His results on clay in the last 4 seasons..Results obtain against..The same players who are also competing in all other surfaces., i.e. the Nalbi, the Djoko, the Almagro, the Monfis, the Gasquet, the Berdy, the Bagdi the AROD the Blake the and so on and so forth..

Now, all these guys, with the exception of (some not all) Spaniard, all of these competitors are grow up more out of clay than on clay:
For all of them their Tennis is more based and suited for middle fast HC (most of the time indoor) courts: It is there that all these players express their best Tennis skills (THE MOST COMPETITIVE GS TITLE IS BY FAR THE USO). Still, we all accept, even with this caveat, that Rafa on clay results are exceptional, his domination is marvelous..

At the contrary, for you FED HATERS, when we are talking about the FED achievements and domination on the last 4 seasons on HC and GC: Ohh, on that case all his achievements and results are garbage are "no value stuff":

Why -This is YOUR UNDERLYING IDEA FED HATERS-? BECAUSE the guy (who managed to win 5 Wimbledon in a row with 4 USO with at least always one of the master in the US series during these 4 seasons) had achieved that only because he HAD THE CHANCE OF PLAYING AGAINST a "clown" opposition an era well bellow the par IF WE COMPARE TO THE "high" '90'S standards..

YOU SEE THE DOUBLE STANDARD..FULL OF CR@P AND THE NO RESPECT FOR FED RESULTS AND CAREER..OR YOU ARE STILL BLIND!!

It is just amazing: In a time in which the overall majority of the top players out there are more HC specialist than clay court specialist, in which the competition is definitely more on this sort of court than on clay..Well the ONLY genius is the clay court champion when the OTHER ONE the man with 12 GS titles and more that 230 consecutive weeks as a no#1 IS NOT A GREAT CHAMPION BECAUSE the competition is less valid than in the '90 and so on and so forth. You see the CR@P with this sort of arguments.

What are you trying to do it is only to discredit FED results and achievements: You are a FED HATERS AND THIS IS WHY..IT IS CLEAR NOW!!!!! Basically you are accepting the double standard CHARACTERIZING ALL Mr.shankar21's posts..YOU SEE NOW: CLEAR

[Start da Game]

^^^
if u can hold all your senses together for a minute, try to think once after reading the entire post.......rafa is truly the best of all time on clay without any doubts......because on clay, he is being truly tested the way he needs to be tested for others to arrive at a conclusion on him.all the current players are simply baseline sluggers(the only aspect where they can be compared to the 90s at least with some conviction) who play clay court game round the year on hardcourts too, and that's exactly what is required on clay to make the competition tougher......and moreover rafa's dominating them like nuts, as if they r some twigs and coming out way on top.however good u are, a record of 115-2, that too in a span of 3 yrs is just way beyond anyone's imagination.......obviously, see federer's record too on clay.it's way too bad than it is on other surfaces.now don't tell me he's losing just to rafa......defeats at the hands of volandri, stepanek,gasquet, etc. is very uncharacteristic.....r they any clay court specialists? r they any supreme talents? tell me on what other surfaces they have defeated federer previously from 2004? all this is happening in mere 2 months for us to think that an odd defeat here n there is acceptable.......even in his matches against rafa too, is he giving rafael a run for his money? he's trailing 9-1 against him on clay.just for one rome final, did he ever look like winning against rafa? if he had succeeded in winning at least some 3 or 4 of big matches with the heart of a lion against a champion like rafa on clay, then u can think he's something extraordinary n can be considered for big issues like GOAT.....but contrary to that, he's been tamed like a cow for many time by rafa.......see the obvious, his competiton is tougher on clay, and hence are his results worst on clay.......so, if you ask me to imagine all the clay greats in one era, i tend to think that nadal might at least edge out every one.......

now see the other surfaces.......grass and hardcourts are the surfaces where a player should be tested thoroughly in three main aspects.......i.e., his attack, offense and defense......federer is predominantly a semi-offensive player(not even offensive, mind it) who likes to play it safe around the baseline area without taking much chances and the current players are mere bull-heads who are just playing it right into his hands.they don't even know how to run to the net correctly, let alone them making an aggressive approach and making a winning volley subsequently.at least they ain't even capable of punching the opponents left and right around the baseline like a kafelnikov or agassi used to do.....federer's game and his approach towards such passive players convinces me to believe that a becker or a rafter would have ripped through his defenses on hards or grass.......maybe you can argue that federer is a great baseliner but he's nothing special at the net. i have seen him volleying many times, he's good at that to an extent, but nothing special.......see nadal-federer matches, you will know about his lack of good volleying skills.nothing special when he is made to make some shoe-lace volleys, lunge-volleys, deep-volleys.good pickers would have picked him off........people always want federer to try something different against nadal but he knows deep-down that he is not that extraordinary at the net.......and added to that misery, nadal once he sees his opponent at the net, always makes his opponent play a shoelace volley first , before going for an outright passing winner straight away unlike other players.......that's why federer's volleying loopholes are exposed greatly against nadal.......

hence, the criterion for federer's hardcourt and grasscourt greatness is not satisfactory by any means.........i agree that there is a lack of clay court specialists these days too......but, the criterion for the clay judgement is satisfactory enough with the presence of numerous baseliners who play predominantly a clay court game on hardcourts too round the year.now that should only make clay court competition relatively tougher than the other surfaces......

[TennisVeritas]

^^^
if u can hold all your senses together for a minute, try to think once after reading the entire post.......rafa is truly the best of all time on clay without any doubts......because on clay, he is being truly tested the way he needs to be tested for others to arrive at a conclusion on him.all the current players are simply baseline sluggers(the only aspect where they can be compared to the 90s at least with some conviction) who play clay court game round the year on hardcourts too, and that's exactly what is required on clay to make the competition tougher......and moreover rafa's dominating them like nuts, as if they r some twigs and coming out way on top.however good u are, a record of 115-2, that too in a span of 3 yrs is just way beyond anyone's imagination.......obviously, see federer's record too on clay.it's way too bad than it is on other surfaces.now don't tell me he's losing just to rafa......defeats at the hands of volandri, stepanek,gasquet, etc. is very uncharacteristic.....r they any clay court specialists? r they any supreme talents? tell me on what other surfaces they have defeated federer previously from 2004? all this is happening in mere 2 months for us to think that an odd defeat here n there is acceptable.......even in his matches against rafa too, is he giving rafael a run for his money? he's trailing 9-1 against him on clay.just for one rome final, did he ever look like winning against rafa? if he had succeeded in winning at least some 3 or 4 of big matches with the heart of a lion against a champion like rafa on clay, then u can think he's something extraordinary n can be considered for big issues like GOAT.....but contrary to that, he's been tamed like a cow for many time by rafa.......see the obvious, his competiton is tougher on clay, and hence are his results worst on clay.......so, if you ask me to imagine all the clay greats in one era, i tend to think that nadal might at least edge out every one.......

now see the other surfaces.......grass and hardcourts are the surfaces where a player should be tested thoroughly in three main aspects.......i.e., his attack, offense and defense......federer is predominantly a semi-offensive player(not even offensive, mind it) who likes to play it safe around the baseline area without taking much chances and the current players are mere bull-heads who are just playing it right into his hands.they don't even know how to run to the net correctly, let alone them making an aggressive approach and making a winning volley subsequently.at least they ain't even capable of punching the opponents left and right around the baseline like a kafelnikov or agassi used to do (IF THE CURRENT PLAYERS ARE SO CR@P WHY OH WHY YOUNG "CRETIN" YOU ARE NOT OUT THERE PLAYING WITH THEM IF IT IS SO EASY TO BEAT A SEMI OFFENSIVE PLAYER LIKE FED  .....federer's game and his approach towards such passive players convinces me to believe that a becker or a rafter would have ripped through his defenses on hards or grass.......maybe you can argue that federer is a great baseliner but he's nothing special at the net. i have seen him volleying many times, he's good at that to an extent, but nothing special.......see nadal-federer matches, you will know about his lack of good volleying skills.nothing special when he is made to make some shoe-lace volleys, lunge-volleys, deep-volleys.good pickers would have picked him off........people always want federer to try something different against nadal but he knows deep-down that he is not that extraordinary at the net.......and added to that misery, nadal once he sees his opponent at the net, always makes his opponent play a shoelace volley first , before going for an outright passing winner straight away unlike other players.......that's why federer's volleying loopholes are exposed greatly against nadal.......

hence, the criterion for federer's hardcourt and grasscourt greatness is not satisfactory by any means.........i agree that there is a lack of clay court specialists these days too......but, the criterion for the clay judgement is satisfactory enough with the presence of numerous baseliners who play predominantly a clay court game on hardcourts too round the year.now that should only make clay court competition relatively tougher than the other surfaces......

So on one side all players are basically playing clay court Tennis during all the season AND in the same time there is no one that is a clay court specialists a part from RAFA. .

OK:You are just a clown..

How, you manage to write down this kind of statements it is just beyond believe!!

So, AROD is playing a clay court game even on HC  ..Nalbi is doing the same. .Djoko (in particular, if there is someone that it is an HC player he is him) he is playing a sort of clay court game all around the season . .And I can continue..Berdy , Bagdy...

IT IS JUST THE CONTRARY IMO: Almost (as I said I do not consider few Spaniard here) all players nowadays have an HC background and this is their main surface even if (thanks to tech IMO) they can play well even outside this surface..

Their tennis is the one best suited for middle fast HC (as I said at the end of the day the most competitive and difficult, in terms of competition, GS to obtain is the USO and by far)..The majority are playing aggressive baseline tennis (thanks, mainly but not only, to the racquet modern technology-go to search what Pete recently said about the modern racquet)..

So, from my point of view all your analysis is wrong.

But given that we disagree even about the evolution of the game: You basically believe that today's Tennis is garbage -a part for the one provided by your Rafa of course and the one of course of his opponents, IF NOT HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY THAT IS SUCH A GREAT PLAYER -  and the '90 game was just magnificent .

When, at the contrary,  I see improvements from the '90 - for instance, today's we get read of specialists in plenty of surface to have finally players who are able to compete during all the season and this is a great plus in my view- so a better game today.

I agree to disagree with you:

You can just continue to believe that today's tennis is garbage and '90 was so beautiful (funny you did not follow live a lot of Tennis there at that time..But OK there were your cusins at that time ).

I simply believe your opinion is wrong and I am entitled to have this opinion.

BTW: You wrote: FED's records on clay it's way too bad than it is on other surfaces.. ..What about the record of your GOAT, Pete..I mean how double standard you can be it is just beyond believe..

Even worst: "even in his matches against Rafa too, is he giving rafael a run for his money? he's trailing 9-1 against him on clay.just for one rome final, did he ever look like winning against rafa? if he had succeeded in winning at least some 3 or 4 of big matches with the heart of a lion against a champion like rafa on clay, then u can think he's something extraordinary n can be considered for big issues like GOAT"..

TWO remarks here: 1. (Historical) Was Pete able to do that? Did he even manage to have more than 1-2 Great matches-IN THE MAIN CLAY EVENT, i.e. RG- against GOAT clay candidates (e.g. Muster, Brugera, Guga) court specialist in his career? I tell you the answer is NO..

He was meeting them time to time outside clay but on clay he had 1-2 meetings at the max  with very bad results at should say!!

Still it is your GOAT..Double standard because you are asking 3-4 VICTORIES to FED against RAFA IN ORDER TO BECOME A GOAT? Why this is a criteria for FED and not for PETE? Yes Pete was playing in the '90, HE WAS BETTER AND BLA AND BLA..Cretin

2. (PRESENT) Is someone out there to have a better H2H against Rafa on clay? Who? Who is the man who end the amazing run of Rafa on clay last year at Hamburg..Who was, one of the few, who pushed him in a 5 sets match: FED !! What the hell you are talking about : Your "opinion" would be a valid one if there was someone out there challenging Rafa on clay ..But there is no one..

And this is because he is ALREADY AN ALL TIME GREAT ON CLAY full stop as FED HE is ALREADY AN ALL TIME GREAT OUT (with) clay- THIS IS A FACT AND YOU HAVE TO DIGEST THAT: FED's DOMINATION IN THE LAST 4 YEARS WAS JUST AMAZING.-

[Start da Game]

anyone can understand what i was trying to say......and they will agree with that or they will simply disagree.but you, hufffff once again you haven't understood a bit......gosh!!! tell me where i have said pete had a great clay record? my point was if fed was that good and if he has a heart of a lion, he should have beaten rafa by now at least on a couple of big occasions on clay.you can't deny the fact that it's clay where you are finding toughest competition and straight away see the obvious, below par results for fed.......no one would ask fed to thrash those clowns on some of those hard and grass surfaces, because most of them haven't got hard/grass court games.now you may sadly cry for that if you want. i don't care.......but it definitely wasn't the same for pete.he showed his heart and courage and ousted champions with sheer ease sometimes and with sheer determination some days on both hards and grass, in an era which contained specialists for each surface and exceptional brilliants like agassi........now that is enough for me if one can show his genius against other geniuses and come out on top, on two surfaces at least......i would cleave to my stance that pete never really bothered much about french.obvious being his lack of participation in various clay tournaments......but i am no where stressing that pete had a great record on clay......why would i? with all your cunning presumptions and reasoning, you are simply displaying your intelligence, or rather the lack of it.......lol

wow.....now you want me to go there and beat federer? you know? i would love to......may be i am not as talented as the current crop are, but you can bet your a$$ that i will be showing more courage and determination than the current crop.......

[TennisVeritas]

anyone can understand what i was trying to say......and they will agree with that or they will simply disagree.but you, hufffff once again you haven't understood a bit......gosh!!! tell me where i have said pete had a great clay record? my point was if fed was that good and if he has a heart of a lion, he should have beaten rafa by now at least on a couple of big occasions on clay.you can't deny the fact that it's clay where you are finding toughest competition and straight away see the obvious, below par results for fed.......no one would ask fed to thrash those clowns on some of those hard and grass surfaces, because most of them haven't got hard/grass court games. [YOU ARE TELLING ME THAT THERE ARE PLENTY OF CLAY COURT SPECIALISTS THEN!! IN YOUR PREVIOUS POST YOU WROTE THAT IN THE CURRENT ERA THERE FEW CLAY COURT SPECIALISTS: WHAT THEY ARE THE GUYS OUT THERE FOR YOU A PART CLOWNS? ] now you may sadly cry for that if you want. i don't care.......but it definitely wasn't the same for pete.he showed his heart and courage and ousted champions with sheer ease sometimes and with sheer determination some days on both hards and grass, in an era which contained specialists for each surface and exceptional brilliants like agassi........now that is enough for me if one can show his genius against other geniuses and come out on top, on two surfaces at least......i would cleave to my stance that pete never really bothered much about french.obvious being his lack of participation in various clay tournaments......but i am no where stressing that pete had a great record on clay......why would i? with all your cunning presumptions and reasoning, you are simply displaying your intelligence, or rather the lack of it.......lol

wow.....now you want me to go there and beat federer? you know? i would love to......may be i am not as talented as the current crop are, but you can bet your a$$ that i will be showing more courage and determination than the current crop.......

Your posts are just a concentrate of contradictions. Why on earth you can prove this statement:

"You can't deny the fact that it's clay where you are finding toughest competition and straight away see the obvious, below par results for fed"

Why? There are more players out there coming and playing from an HC preparation. I have already told you 10000000 the most competitive and difficult (in terms of potential tricky opponent waiting you at each round) is DEFINITELY the USO not the French.The French is difficult from a physical perspective: But, nowadays, if you are a Rafa or even a FED (and soon a Djoko) you are even not spending so much of energy out there.

And then after you are telling me: "I am not as talented as the current crop are, but you can bet your a$$ that I will be showing more courage and determination than the current crop."

And here you are showing your real (ARROGANT AT WILL) NATURE: OUT THERE THEY ARE ALL CLOWNS..But this implies clowns for BOTH FED and RAFA..

What the hell? You are here posting how magnificent are the results of Rafa HOW GREAT ARE THE N# OF VICTORIES VS LOSS IN THE LAST 4 YEARS but then without any problems you are saying THAT FED results they are cr@p because he was (IS) playing against clowns: IF THEY ARE CLOWNS, i.e. no courage no determination -YOUR WORDS- (AROD, NOLE, FERRER WITHOUT DETERMINATION ) (and they aren't IMO) then they are CLOWNS for BOTH and this tarnish both the achievements not only this of the player you hate..

Comprende!!

[the Batman]

Ok, but what exactly do you think about Hosé Higueras's impact ?

[TennisVeritas]

Ok, but what exactly do you think about Hosé Higueras's impact ?

Hi Batman, to be honest: Too early to judge..I mean they started working together just before the clay court season, they did not spend at least two weeks out of the tour together doing training and working really: No too early..We need to let him more time..

[Start da Game]

hahahahahaha US open is your hot-spot.......that is the worst tournament these days and is disgusting to watch.......those are the quickest surfaces on earth and players don't even have a clue on how to use the pace to their progression during matches.......

at least guys like nole, nadal are having some guts and that "in your face" character to take it to any one even and if they aren't equipped with good volleying skills, they are at least good enough to have a crack at any one from the baseline......the rest of the players are not even half good as they are......anyway i have always maintained some exceptions to the group of "clowns", because of whom tennis is still somewhat interesting at times......

[Start da Game]

also it's quite impressive how you understand everything and pretend as if i have come up with some thing that can be dealt with as a big sin......

[Dallas]

Ok, but what exactly do you think about Hosé Higueras's impact ?

Thank you batman for getting the topic back on track!

[TennisVeritas]

hahahahahaha US open is your hot-spot.......that is the worst tournament these days and is disgusting to watch.......those are the quickest surfaces on earth and players don't even have a clue on how to use the pace to their progression during matches.......

at least guys like nole, nadal are having some guts and that "in your face" character to take it to any one even and if they aren't equipped with good volleying skills, they are at least good enough to have a crack at any one from the baseline......the rest of the players are not even half good as they are......anyway i have always maintained some exceptions to the group of "clowns", because of whom tennis is still somewhat interesting at times......

You should at least learn two or three FACTS:

1) This is your opinion, i.e. the USO is the less attractive one and this is not something you can be proved in any objective way so this is not TRUE for everyone: It is a questions of preferences..Conclusion: Start to respect other preferences..It will be already a great step forward, mr. arrogant.
 
2) I did not say that this is my preferred GS: I said this is the most tricky competitive wise to obtain ("nuance" is french like "cretin")..I GUESS, YOU THINK JUST THE OPPOSITE BECAUSE FED HAS JUST WON 4 USO IN A ROW SO IT NEEDS TO BE EASY AND TERRIBLE TO WATCH

3) My preferred Slam is Wimbledon: it always was and always will be..

[Alison2006]

Tennisveritas may I ask you your views on Andy Murray  I only ask you as your are such an expert on Tennis, I would like to know your views on his game.

I only ask you on this thread as this is where most of your time is spent (or on the RF thread) 

Would you bring your expert view over om my Andy Murray thread please?

It will make a change to hear your expert views on another player

Thankyou

[pawan89]

Tennisveritas may I ask you your views on Andy Murray  I only ask you as your are such an expert on Tennis, I would like to know your views on his game.

I only ask you on this thread as this is where most of your time is spent (or on the RF thread) 

Would you bring your expert view over om my Andy Murray thread please?

It will make a change to hear your expert views on another player

Thankyou

IT's been quite a change to hear you not mention Federer in one or two posts, good job Alison

TV is one of the only people who goes through the trouble to point out Fed-haters double standards and thier fantastic logic, I don't know why he tries.. its pointless 

[Start da Game]

hahahahahaha US open is your hot-spot.......that is the worst tournament these days and is disgusting to watch.......those are the quickest surfaces on earth and players don't even have a clue on how to use the pace to their progression during matches.......

at least guys like nole, nadal are having some guts and that "in your face" character to take it to any one even and if they aren't equipped with good volleying skills, they are at least good enough to have a crack at any one from the baseline......the rest of the players are not even half good as they are......anyway i have always maintained some exceptions to the group of "clowns", because of whom tennis is still somewhat interesting at times......

You should at least learn two or three FACTS:

1) This is your opinion, i.e. the USO is the less attractive one and this is not something you can be proved in any objective way so this is not TRUE for everyone: It is a questions of preferences..Conclusion: Start to respect other preferences..It will be already a great step forward, mr. arrogant.
 
2) I did not say that this is my preferred GS: I said this is the most tricky competitive wise to obtain ("nuance" is french like "cretin")..I GUESS, YOU THINK JUST THE OPPOSITE BECAUSE FED HAS JUST WON 4 USO IN A ROW SO IT NEEDS TO BE EASY AND TERRIBLE TO WATCH

3) My preferred Slam is Wimbledon: it always was and always will be..

you ain't getting the point straight.......intentionally diverting yourself to things like federer is winning that, federer is losing that and so i am posting like that.....as i said earlier, you are getting too protective on federer......seriously something's wrong with you.i think maybe it's your psyche......maybe i am subjective here.......lol.....because some people might perceive things differently from your posts, like the above one for example......

[Start da Game]

An interesting link describing one person's view of Fed's 'dilemma'.
http://blog.webtennis.net/

good article and very true......it's a myth that one can't be a good net-player these days......all you need is the ability......some will, some courage to back your ability......as someone pointed out rightly in the article, it's true that tennis will fade off if players aren't taught tennis on the lines of all-court-game......we are losing the essence of tennis with all this just-only baseline slug-fest and it's a danger sign that many of the 15, 16 yr olds who have taken up this sport are already possessed with the fallacy that SNV is a dangerous thing to try a hand at......

[falcon]

With the grass courts getting slower and slower i don't know if its a very wise idea to teach serve and volley to a young budding player..because most of the players today are such good baseliners..sure it steals some variety and beauty in the game..but its effectiveness we are talking about...I think SNV is a technique that comes a bit naturally..like super quick reflexes..they can be taught to a certain extent...may be transition game can be taught but after that if you are at the net..it depends solely on how your reflexes are..a case in point..Lendl was a good baseliner (sampras calls him a top 5 material of all times) yet we see that he failed to do very well near the net..perhaps that's why he never won the wimby..when he reached the finals of the wmby in 86 against a very young and athletic Becker, Becker served and volleyed his way and went on to hold serve quite conveniently but brought Lendl close to the net on the return games and Lendl could not match up with Becker's superb net play. Though fresh from winning the french, Lendl lost in straight sets to the champion...Lendl thereafter tried to improve his net play on many occasions yet failed to do it on grass...that is I'm trying to say that Becker had excellent reflexes at the net as a 17 or an 18 year old...while Lendl 'knew' how to play at the net and yet could not put it to much effect perhaps because he 'learnt' how to play at teh net a bit late...That's where I'm talking about Jose's influence..we know that Fed has got the game at the net yet its the effectiveness we are talking about..Fed's anticipation is superb while Pete's reflexes were out of the world and that's where the two differ at their net play. SnV can be taught to kids only if the coach identifies his charge to be 'really' effective at the net..something what Pete's coach did..Pete used to play his backhand with both hands and had a talent near the net..so the coach made Pete to play the backhand with a single hand and this took his net game to a new level.