OT: Wimbledon, American Men
Good showing from the Americans so far.
Sam Querrey is on to the third, facing J.W. Tsonga. Couple of pretty similar players, Querrey matches up somewhat well with him. Neither guy is a great mover.
Steve Johnson also on to the third, he has to play Cilic. Another guy similar to him but a better overall game.
D. Young getting ready to play Nadal, that should go horribly.
Jared Donaldson, Ryan Harrison, John Isner, Jack Sock, Tiafoe still all in it.
Maybe someone can finally break through.
man, i remember the days of connors, mcenroe, agassi, sampras. it's been a long time since the dominant force wasn't from elsewhere....
To have a guy like David Ferrer, Tsonga, Cilic, etc... Who was always just outside the top circle and unfortunately landed in the same era as some of the best to ever play.
The US men haven't had anyone even CLOSE to that level since Roddick.
"The US men haven't had anyone even CLOSE to that level since Roddick.". Wow. That's saying something.
I agree BTW. Just hadn't thought of that name in quite some time.
Off memory, believe it was Wimbledon 2009.
Pretty much had it locked up against Federer, and completely flubbed a gimme shot in the middle of a tiebreak.
Since then, I believe Querrey going to Wimbledon QF is the farthest.
They showed a graphic during yesterday's ESPN coverage that an American man had not won a grand slam singles title since 2003 (Roddick at Wimbledon) and hadn't even made a slam semi-final since 2009. Having grown up with the game through Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Courier, and Aggasi (and even Chang and Roddick, who seemed to be the heir apparent for a while), I would have never believed a drought of this length was possible.
US Open in 03.
You are correct. Roddick's 2003 win was at US Open, not Wimbledon as I incorrectly stated. That was the last time a US man won a grand slam singles title, and Roddick's lone grand slam title.
He made the final in 2009 at Wimbledon, losing 16-14 in the fifth to Federer. That was the last time a US man reached a grand slam semi-finals in singles.
It also doesn't help that the big four are still dominating almost every major, every year.
Almost every tournament, someone unexpected makes a deep run. It is never always chalk.
Having Querrey be the only guy to make a QF since 2009 is not acceptable for the USA, seeing as how we had the best players in the world not that long ago.
I am not even asking for someone to be at Federer-level. Give me someone that is constantly in the top 10 and has a great all-around game, and doesn't have to rely on one thing (ie, Isner with his serve). No one on the current tour is even a viable threat to win a major.
Jack Sock is quickly becoming exactly what you are describing. He's shown that he is willing to put in the work to fix his deficiencies and is only 24 years old. He is just a little behind where you would normally expect a future top 10 player to be at his age, but you have to keep in mind that he is a guy who had the normal kid high school experience. He played on his high school team for 4 years and basically ignored the junior circuit. He doesn't have a ton of points to defend at Wimbledon because he went out in the 3rd round last year, so it's possible he'll be top 15 if he continues playing well this week.
He has already participated in 18 majors (since 2010) and he hasn't made it to a single QF yet. The clay (which was debated before) is one of his more favorable surfaces, and he got popped in the first round in the French a month ago.
Sock has not had the upward trajectory that the other stars have. If he had one breakthrough tournament, fine. He hasn't made it really all that far in any major.
He will be 25 in September. He's not the youngest cat in the world, when these guys hit 30 (other than the greats), they fade. In the next few years, he better show a MASSIVE leap. He's not rising fast enough.
Judging a player just by majors isn't something you should be doing, especially with the Big 4 being active. Sock has had a steady climb in the rankings, especially since rebuilding his backhand. He's probably the youngest 24 year old on tour, because he basically played no international tennis until he was 18, unlike most of his peers who started playing overseas when they were 16.
12 of the top 25 players are over 30, so it isn't just the "greats" that are playing longer. Hell, Wawrinka didn't become a major name until his late 20's.
Jack Sock is the best American tennis player right now, and I doubt that changes, barring injury, in the next 5 years. I'd also be willing to bet that he wins a major in the next three years.
Are what matters most in tennis. And 24 is 24, father time doesn't separate when you started.
I am absolutely willing to take that bet that in the next 3 years, he will not win a major. If he has a breakthrough and makes a QF or a SF shortly, I will change my mind on that. He has not even been close to that yet.
I know it sounds like I am bashing the kid, I'm not. But I think we have a fundamental disagreement on how we judge him. And when I've watched his matches in majors against the better competition, he is honestly not close.
Yeah he'll win tournaments occasionally here and there, but most likely it won't be a major or one of the Masters 1000 tournaments unless there are a ton of upsets/injuries. Guys are coming up behind him that will or already have passed him. His backhand is still a huge weakness.
It's funny that you mention these names - we were talking about that period of tennis this morning actually at work. Of course, McEnroe's famous / infamous "ANSWER THE QUESTION!" outburst was still getting chuckles from those who were around to remember it, but yeah, those were some interesting times.
Relatively weak effort. You are better than that.
Probably has the best ground game at this point.
Sometimes has that issue that Querrey deals with where he gets randomly lost mentally during critical moments in a match. Not in great shape, not a tremendous mover. He really needs to slim up and quit playing doubles (which I believe he has).
He has taken steps to get in better physical condition & he's playing less doubles. I think he is entered in the mixed.
If you want to be one of the best in the world, you can't play mixed or doubles. None of the top pros have any form of a career in doubles competition.
For me, I think it would mess up your game more than help. It is a completely different style. It is all about reaction, doesn't really matter how hard you hit the ball in doubles.
I don't agree entirely, but do for the most part. If he's just doing it because he doesn't like going to the practice court during tournaments, that's one thing. If he's spending significant time putting prep into his doubles game, instead of his singles game, that's something else entirely. He's young enough right now where it shouldn't be a problem for him to play one of the doubles events. Doubles is a great way to work on your return of serve as well as net play. It doesn't really mess with your game at all. His biggest problems in his game right now are his substandard backhand & mental. He gets pissy on court way too quickly. Hopefully it's just a maturity thing for him and won't be a hindrance in the latter half of his career.
There is a strong connection as to why the best of the best focus basically 100 percent on singles play and never dabble in doubles. It is an entirely different game. None of the top guys approach the net. It forces them to do something they don't do, and takes away from what they do well.
All of the Big 4 approach the net. A big reason why Federer has remained at the top of the game is because of the work he did with Edberg to improve his volleying and adopt a more attacking style. Murray, Djokovic, Nadal and Federer all have good transition games to get to the net. A lot of the top players stop playing doubles as much because they want to spend their time training, resting & recovering as opposed to spending their free time at tournaments on the court playing doubles. It has nothing to do with doubles being drastically different from singles.
Young players should especially be playing doubles when they first get on tour (and at lower levels as well). It forces you to work on your return game, transitioning to the net as well as volleying in different positions.
As to how much the Big 4 approach the net. Because I watch tennis religiously, and it is all about direction, power, and beastly serving. They may come to net when they know the other dude is on the back foot, but I don't see it much.
Federer is the only one I would even consider as someone who approaches the net and he doesn't even do it that often anymore. All of the Big 4 can obviously volley, but coming to the net isn't a staple in their games. Players like Rafter, Henman, Edberg, even Sampras to an extent, those were guys who you knew were coming to the net because that was part of their game. Just look at the faded grass from this and the previous 4 years of Wimbledon and compare it with the faded grass from a decade ago. The game has certainly evolved into baseline rallies and big serves.
It is no longer a staple of the men's game that's for sure. However, there has been a movement back towards transitioning into the net when their opponent is in trouble instead of continuing to bash away from the baseline. I'm actually surprised a player like Mischa Zverev can be as far up in the rankings as he is considering how much he serves and volleys. To be at the very top of the game, you have to have variety though.
when doing laundry for a teenage boy.
Username checks out
Takes out Kvitova.
Not going to happen for the men, but a good showing nevertheless.
Does not look right now that anyone is going to be able to beat Nadal. That could change, but I doubt it. Nadal is playing too well for the rest of the field at present.
He's not even the favorite
What difference does that make? You don't get any points for being the favorite.
That only makes a difference for gamblers. If I was in Vegas right now, I would be laying money on Nadal.
I'm not even referring to the odds. He hasn't been past the 4th round since 2011. I wouldn't put it past him making a big run. I also wouldn't be surprised if he gets knocked out in the next round.
Yes, I was referring to his recent history on grass coupled with his results this year on grass (he has none). It's his most vulnerable surface for him to be upset by an unknown. Expert picks pre-tournament that are not based on vegas odds you seem to be tied too. The form of other top players in the draw. The difficult draw that he has in general. The fact that he's in the same half of the draw as the defending champion who has looked very sharp in early rounds. You can be triggered all you want, so go ahead and try to hit me, and miss, with another "clever" zinger.
I am not going to argue tennis, which I still play competitively on a national basis, which a guy who thinks Isner has a good chance to make it through. (BTW---Isner is a great guy, and I would so happy for him were he to do that, but I'm not holding my breath.)
You're not the only one. Isner's game is trash though.
If Nadal is healthy and playing well, I'll take him over anyone in the world. Even on grass. He's just so damn competitive and determined that he forces his opponent to play out of his mind for five sets to even have a chance at beating him. That being said, I'm pulling for Federer.
I'm in the exact same spot.
In his prime, during the 3-5 year run of it, RF was the best tennis player you could possibly imagine, and the best the game has ever seen IMO.
And he he all class, besides. Easy guy to root for.
Eventually there will be another American male star, but I am not sure we can identify the one who will do it at present. Probably not even born yet, but who knows?
Sadly none of them will live to see the second week. I'm disappointed in the state of American men's tennis too, but right now it's all about Roger baby! Go for 19!
Isner has a pretty good draw. He could make it through if he doesn't choke.
Have a good draw:
If Querrey gets past Tsonga, he'll go up against Anderson/Bemelmans, before getting wacked by Murray. So he could go QF.
Johnson v Cilic. Tough match, but after that I would actually like his chances against Nishokori/Agut. Again, he's cooked at QF if he makes it that far, but I think a couple of winnable ones.
Sock looks to have the best draw IMO. He'll win tomorrow (hopefully) against Ofner, and then have Zverev. Could go up against Raonic in R16, which is a coin-toss. Raonic is not close to 100 percent healthy.
I actually do not like Isner's draw. He'll go up against Dimitrov, who would be his kryptonite. Fast mover.
Donaldson and Harrison, who knows. Could steal a match at most.
I didn't include include Querrey or Johnson because Tsonga and Cilic are incredibly difficult matches on grass. Cilic has been one of the better grass court players this year. I didn't think Sock's draw is good because he has to play Zverev who is also one of the better players on grass this year.
Isner has the better match-up against Dimitrov because he can take the racquet right out of Dimitrov's hands. Dimitrov is also very up and down mentally and Isner's serve could really frustrate him.
See ya, Isner.