Albany, Western Australia, when I was a kid growing up learning the game of tennis was home to so many outstanding players it was ridiculous. I believe it all stemmed from one man's driving force, Holmsey. I was invited as a 14 year old to hit with both Pete and his mates on a weekly basis, either match play or drills.
Some days Pete would make it up as he went along, I liked this idea, no real set routines, that's me now days, it's always something that I have been most comfortable with.
I remember one day Pete taking me to the indoor center and pausing for a moment before saying " Let's play two sets". I still remember the score, he killed me 3 and 1 but he told me my first set was great and his second set was one of his best sets. I wasn't disappointed because it gave me that sense of where I was at with my tennis.
It's like the runner who wins his 100 meter sprint by 15 meters in the local competition then goes to the City and runs third to the best in the State. A real indication to current form.
There was amazing talent from my age through to guys aged around 40 and plenty of tournaments plus pennant competition. If you wanted to get 'high' on tennis there was no excuse not to, it was a sport that was big in Albany, probably just as big with adults back then as it was the juniors.
I was also extremely fortunate to have one of the State's best junior players living here in Albany, Mark Leuba. Now Mark was the number one ranked player in Western Australia for the 14's age group, his standard was far superior to mine. Even though he lived in Albany, four hours from the State's best players he was the bench mark, an outstanding talent coached by his father.
I got to know Mark through the tennis club scene and we hit regularly in my fourteenth year. We didn't drill, we just played sets, it was a fantastic way to experiment with the art of point construction.
Between my tuition from Pete plus set play with Mark my standard went from fairly average to very competitive in a short time frame. I used to play Junior Club set play on Saturday mornings at the Country and Suburban Tennis Club (C and S) on Albany Highway then Senior Club in the afternoon.
Doing the sums on how many hours I spent on court each Saturday I suppose at a rough count it may have been seven hours, enough time to get grooved. The reason why I eventually left C and S was because a Senior player accused me of hitting the ball too hard to older players! I found this rather comical as I only ever hit with a heap of topspin, never with pace, I simply played a 'safe' style.
I suppose the generation gap in sport can sometimes be an issue particularly with the 'more experienced' players. If these players are getting a run around from 13 and 14 year old kids then that can be degrading to some. Others will take up the challenge.
Last January I lost in the final of my local Doubles Championship to a couple of young guys who I used to teach but I was so proud of them. I was also proud of myself for still being able to give them a decent match.
That's the thing about tennis. If you still feel that you can give something to the game as you get a little older and slower then that's a good thing. While we are still breathing and can swing a racket it's important to still test the mind and body. Tennis is a game that does both in many ways and it actually becomes clearer to understand as you gain experience.
However as the great Jimmy Connors once stated "The problem with experience is that by the time you get it , you are too damn old to enjoy it"........
Stay fit, that's my view........
Chapter 9 on it's way
Sunday, 30 November 2014
Friday, 28 November 2014
'THE WALL AND THE COURT' Part 7
When a guy who is commonly known as a Tennis Coach begins working with you at a young age there is a significant amount of experience changing hands. On one side of the coin you have a 'guru', a type of sporting 'zen master' who knows the game so well it's almost embarrassing.
On the other side it's like a new born puppy learning some new life skills and that peeing on the carpet is not one of them.There were certain areas I had to learn about the game.
My greatest issue with the game of tennis was that I had watched Borg and Wilander play who didn't volley much, if it was good enough for them to stay back, well......
So my biggest area of improvement, like that puppy who needed to learn his limitations in life was to accept the fact that my game was so one dimensional it was laughable. I needed a volley. My only trips to the net were usually to shake hands and whilst this was good enough to beat the locals it was never going to be good enough to win against the better players.
Pete started from the beginning with my volleys, the grip, the lack of follow through, the shoulder turn on the backhand volley in particular and the footwork. We worked on the approach shot also, the shot to get me into the net in the first place and the split step.
There was no point in continuing the run to the net if the ball was on me before I got there, stop, split step, volley, then get in to finish the point.
Pete would give me drills that were match situation type drills, realistic ones that were always going to come to fruition in a match. I vividly remember the approach shot drill. Pete would start me in 'green light' territory, half way between the baseline and service line, feed me a short ball then get me moving forward. He would hit me a ball when I reached the service line, working on a good deep first volley in followed by a final move close to the net to finish the point.
I liked this drill as it taught me basic things that I didn't know about the game. Sometimes I would see kids trying to emulate their hero's and with no disrespect it didn't look quite right particularly on the net charge. Running in from the base line resembled a charge from soldiers in the trenches, there was never going to be enough time to get where they needed to be.
I likened the base line to a trench, a red light area, do not go, stay and fight.
I enjoyed the simple way in which Holmsey taught me to get into a position that would conserve my legs and stamina, a way to end a point at last that didn't take me 40 shots. He taught me that I didn't always have to be the 'hunted', I could at last be the 'hunter', it all made perfect sense, implementing in was another story.
I did a rough count the other day when I was doing a lesson of my own that a student will hit around six to seven hundred balls in an hour of technique oriented hitting. That's a lot of balls hit.
If the balls are hit correctly then improvement will be just around the corner but during that session it is also an obligation to teach tactics also, the two go hand in hand. So it's one thing to teach a student to hit a ball correctly, it's another to teach them how to play tennis, one without the other is pointless. I learned from Pete that staying back and playing in the 'trenches' will only make me predictable to play and cannon fodder for a smart player.
Learning the approach and the net game was something I will be forever grateful to Holmsey for as it gave my tennis game a new found sense of freedom. I was out of the trenches and into the front line, dangerous yet strangely exciting. No longer the hunted I now felt like a hunter in search of prey. I was ready to implement the changes and become a more complete player.........
Part 8 to follow
On the other side it's like a new born puppy learning some new life skills and that peeing on the carpet is not one of them.There were certain areas I had to learn about the game.
My greatest issue with the game of tennis was that I had watched Borg and Wilander play who didn't volley much, if it was good enough for them to stay back, well......
So my biggest area of improvement, like that puppy who needed to learn his limitations in life was to accept the fact that my game was so one dimensional it was laughable. I needed a volley. My only trips to the net were usually to shake hands and whilst this was good enough to beat the locals it was never going to be good enough to win against the better players.
Pete started from the beginning with my volleys, the grip, the lack of follow through, the shoulder turn on the backhand volley in particular and the footwork. We worked on the approach shot also, the shot to get me into the net in the first place and the split step.
There was no point in continuing the run to the net if the ball was on me before I got there, stop, split step, volley, then get in to finish the point.
Pete would give me drills that were match situation type drills, realistic ones that were always going to come to fruition in a match. I vividly remember the approach shot drill. Pete would start me in 'green light' territory, half way between the baseline and service line, feed me a short ball then get me moving forward. He would hit me a ball when I reached the service line, working on a good deep first volley in followed by a final move close to the net to finish the point.
I liked this drill as it taught me basic things that I didn't know about the game. Sometimes I would see kids trying to emulate their hero's and with no disrespect it didn't look quite right particularly on the net charge. Running in from the base line resembled a charge from soldiers in the trenches, there was never going to be enough time to get where they needed to be.
I likened the base line to a trench, a red light area, do not go, stay and fight.
I enjoyed the simple way in which Holmsey taught me to get into a position that would conserve my legs and stamina, a way to end a point at last that didn't take me 40 shots. He taught me that I didn't always have to be the 'hunted', I could at last be the 'hunter', it all made perfect sense, implementing in was another story.
I did a rough count the other day when I was doing a lesson of my own that a student will hit around six to seven hundred balls in an hour of technique oriented hitting. That's a lot of balls hit.
If the balls are hit correctly then improvement will be just around the corner but during that session it is also an obligation to teach tactics also, the two go hand in hand. So it's one thing to teach a student to hit a ball correctly, it's another to teach them how to play tennis, one without the other is pointless. I learned from Pete that staying back and playing in the 'trenches' will only make me predictable to play and cannon fodder for a smart player.
Learning the approach and the net game was something I will be forever grateful to Holmsey for as it gave my tennis game a new found sense of freedom. I was out of the trenches and into the front line, dangerous yet strangely exciting. No longer the hunted I now felt like a hunter in search of prey. I was ready to implement the changes and become a more complete player.........
Part 8 to follow
Wednesday, 26 November 2014
'THE WALL AND THE COURT' Part 6
From memory Peter Holmes, 'Pete' or 'Holmsey' drove an old Ford that did not have a working speedometer and I have a feeling the fuel gauge didn't function properly either. I am pretty sure that Holmsey simply just guessed how fast he was going and kept his fuel tank topped up.
As far as local sporting identities in Albany were concerned Pete was right up there as far as 'Zen Master's' were concerned. Pete not only played tennis at a level that no one else could touch but his teaching of the game was also legendary.
I am pretty sure that Dad knew Pete from the local Golf Club as tennis wasn't his only sport, I heard he could also swing a golf club fairly well. Come to think of it Squash was another of Holmsey's sports and he played this at the highest level also, I watched him play one day, impressive. Dad knew I needed to learn the intricacies of tennis and there was no better man to teach the game locally than Pete.
Now my first introduction to Holmsey was from memory like meeting a Tennis Professional as I had seen him play at my local club and his standard was remarkably high. I also recall his unique way of talking about the game and the manner in which he spoke, he didn't stop ! In fact Pete spoke so fast and so much that a tiny spot of saliva would form at the corner of his mouth as he would rattle off facts and figures. I was without a doubt in awe of his knowledge. I knew he could help me.
I have always stated that it's one thing to be able to hit a tennis ball, it's another to be able to play tennis, Peter could do both plus he could teach it better than anyone by all reports. We 'hired' Pete. From memory again I believe we initially paid him $12 an hour for him to teach me the finer points of the game which he eventually put up to $15, Pete wasn't in it for the money, obviously.
That's the one thing that struck me about Pete, he was generous, not in the game for the dollar, it was as though he just did it because he was bloody good at it and there was no one else to do it ! But he was passionate about it, the way he talked, the way he played and the way he taught the game, he was a man to be respected.
The trips in his car out to the local tennis club were also educational as he would give me his version of what was going on in World Tennis and how to improve my game. I suppose that even though at the time I didn't realize it I was not only getting taught on court, I was learning the game on the drive to and from the club also.
Pete was teaching me how to play tennis and he did it so well that within maybe 6 to 8 months I could actually give him a decent hit. He always beat me but I made him play plenty of balls.
I am sure I use his philosophies each time I do a lesson now days, you never forget who taught you to play the game and you never forget how you were taught. That tuition if it has substance will always be in the fore front of your mind if you teach it yourself one day. The tactical side of tennis is what will just about always beat the opposition who just have flair without the knowledge. Pete taught me tactics.
I will never forget just a few months after turning 14 I drew the reigning Club Champion John Knuimann in the first round of our Club Championships .
John had won the title on perhaps 3 or 4 occasions and he had a great serve and volley so his style suited me, he gave me targets. I stood back 10 foot behind the base line as my hero 'Borgie' did and I pushed him all the way in a 5-7, 4-6 loss.
Within 6 months of learning tactics with Pete I had a win over John that I will never forget. It was a night match at our indoor venue and I played John in a best of three match that I won 2 and 3 then in one more practice set I beat him 6-4. I was learning how to play.
My fourteenth year was a time where I had learned that hitting on a wall was one thing but understanding how to play tennis was another.
Peter Holmes had a remarkably knowledgeable way of teaching tennis and I am disappointed that I was too young at the time to have really appreciated his input into my tennis. He gave my game substance that without his coaching would only have ever been 'tactical cannon fodder'. Holmsey could walk the walk, talk the talk, he could have made a player out of a card board cut out, genius.........
Part 7 to follow
As far as local sporting identities in Albany were concerned Pete was right up there as far as 'Zen Master's' were concerned. Pete not only played tennis at a level that no one else could touch but his teaching of the game was also legendary.
I am pretty sure that Dad knew Pete from the local Golf Club as tennis wasn't his only sport, I heard he could also swing a golf club fairly well. Come to think of it Squash was another of Holmsey's sports and he played this at the highest level also, I watched him play one day, impressive. Dad knew I needed to learn the intricacies of tennis and there was no better man to teach the game locally than Pete.
Now my first introduction to Holmsey was from memory like meeting a Tennis Professional as I had seen him play at my local club and his standard was remarkably high. I also recall his unique way of talking about the game and the manner in which he spoke, he didn't stop ! In fact Pete spoke so fast and so much that a tiny spot of saliva would form at the corner of his mouth as he would rattle off facts and figures. I was without a doubt in awe of his knowledge. I knew he could help me.
I have always stated that it's one thing to be able to hit a tennis ball, it's another to be able to play tennis, Peter could do both plus he could teach it better than anyone by all reports. We 'hired' Pete. From memory again I believe we initially paid him $12 an hour for him to teach me the finer points of the game which he eventually put up to $15, Pete wasn't in it for the money, obviously.
That's the one thing that struck me about Pete, he was generous, not in the game for the dollar, it was as though he just did it because he was bloody good at it and there was no one else to do it ! But he was passionate about it, the way he talked, the way he played and the way he taught the game, he was a man to be respected.
The trips in his car out to the local tennis club were also educational as he would give me his version of what was going on in World Tennis and how to improve my game. I suppose that even though at the time I didn't realize it I was not only getting taught on court, I was learning the game on the drive to and from the club also.
Pete was teaching me how to play tennis and he did it so well that within maybe 6 to 8 months I could actually give him a decent hit. He always beat me but I made him play plenty of balls.
I am sure I use his philosophies each time I do a lesson now days, you never forget who taught you to play the game and you never forget how you were taught. That tuition if it has substance will always be in the fore front of your mind if you teach it yourself one day. The tactical side of tennis is what will just about always beat the opposition who just have flair without the knowledge. Pete taught me tactics.
I will never forget just a few months after turning 14 I drew the reigning Club Champion John Knuimann in the first round of our Club Championships .
John had won the title on perhaps 3 or 4 occasions and he had a great serve and volley so his style suited me, he gave me targets. I stood back 10 foot behind the base line as my hero 'Borgie' did and I pushed him all the way in a 5-7, 4-6 loss.
Within 6 months of learning tactics with Pete I had a win over John that I will never forget. It was a night match at our indoor venue and I played John in a best of three match that I won 2 and 3 then in one more practice set I beat him 6-4. I was learning how to play.
My fourteenth year was a time where I had learned that hitting on a wall was one thing but understanding how to play tennis was another.
Peter Holmes had a remarkably knowledgeable way of teaching tennis and I am disappointed that I was too young at the time to have really appreciated his input into my tennis. He gave my game substance that without his coaching would only have ever been 'tactical cannon fodder'. Holmsey could walk the walk, talk the talk, he could have made a player out of a card board cut out, genius.........
Part 7 to follow
Tuesday, 25 November 2014
'THE WALL AND THE COURT' Part 5
I will never forget my first ever tournament, I believe I may have just turned 13 or it may have been a week before as my birthday is in January, as was the Albany Junior Open. This tournament was a chance to prove that all my hitting against the wall had paid dividends.
Two brothers who were regional 'hot shots' came to play the tournament and I drew the oldest one in the first round. Looking back I had hit a lot of tennis balls but I didn't actually know how to play tennis.
The initial rounds were just one set matches and I got a free tennis lesson from this kid who I refer to still as 'Mr Tennis'. I called him this because he was the best player I had seen, way better than all of the kids I had hit against at Junior Club on Saturday mornings. This guy was a player who actually knew tactics and how to play someone like me who could get a ball in but didn't have a clue how to win a point. 6-0 to 'Mr Tennis'.
What disappointed me more than the loss was his rather cocky way of strutting around after the win and his official 'postmortem' of our match to his mates. I had gone up to the board to see when my doubles match was to be played and I heard him say that 'Thompson's weak'.
This was possibly my first real indication that I was playing a sport that was more than just a physical outing. It was a personality war, an ego battle, a way to gain a mental edge over somebody and it wasn't just confined to the tennis court. My way of thinking was that it was an opportunity to have 'something' over somebody after a win, sort of like owning a part of them, perhaps their mind.
It was starting to make sense to me as i watched 'Mr Tennis' strut around as a group of others would follow him, like a bunch of ducklings following their mother. This guy seemed to have an aura about him but I didn't know why, after all he was just a fairly big kid who could hit a tennis ball well with an old wooden racket. Confusing.
Being at your first ever tennis tournament gives you a view on the game that will probably stay with you forever, good or bad. Mine was bad. I didn't like the way the good players strutted around and hung off the back fence asking their buddies for regular score updates. I didn't like the lack of sympathy for the guys that got smashed, like me, and I didn't like the 'posse' style of hot shot players thinking they owned the place.
There was a part of tennis that I already didn't like just an hour or two into my first competition.
I recall speaking with my advanced group of players some 25 years later and telling them that if I witness the 'posse' strutting around and asking mates for scores then we would be having words.
I think they understood that it was a part of tournaments that I despised but I didn't tell them that I had seen it at my first ever competition as a kid. Unfortunately the 'posse' still exists and the modern day Coach turns a blind eye, not sure why as it reflects on their 'mentoring' skills. There's nothing wrong with a group of kids hanging out at a tournament but when they intimidate kids at the back of courts with their presence and score asking I find that disappointing.
My first ever tennis tournament was a flop, I had hit thousands of tennis balls that accounted for nothing, I had no idea how to play tennis and I hated certain aspects of the tournament scene. Whilst I was not interested in getting around at a tournament with a group of sidekicks I was interested in having another shot at 'Mr Tennis'. Perhaps that was my first sign of having an ego, a necessity for the sport of tennis.
My next year of learning the game is not clear to me but all I remember was when I turned 14 I was a much better player than the one who got belted by the big guy 12 months earlier. The Albany Open that year unfortunately did not give me my return bout against 'Mr Tennis' but the 'tennis gods' were looking after me. I drew the younger brother of 'Mr Tennis' in an early round, he was just as sure of his own importance as his older brother was. If ever there was a chance to right some wrongs of a year earlier this was it.
I don't forget too many matches or scores and I will never forget this one as I beat 'Young Mr Tennis' by a score of 6-3, I remember playing well. I made a point of walking close to this kid as he walked to his older brother and gave him the score. " You lost to Thompson" ??!! I didn't hear the reply, I kept walking, mission accomplished.
I won my age group that year and I had gotten some sweet revenge even though it was not against the guy I really wanted to beat but I had a moral victory. Tennis was a game that I knew I could play but I didn't like certain aspects of the tournament scene, I still don't.
To this day I don't ask people the score and I cringe when I see others do it, young or older players, a part of the game that should command common sense, yet it doesn't.
My earliest memories of the game were not all good but I loved playing, there was a burning desire to get better, but I needed a Coach......
Part 6 to follow....
Two brothers who were regional 'hot shots' came to play the tournament and I drew the oldest one in the first round. Looking back I had hit a lot of tennis balls but I didn't actually know how to play tennis.
The initial rounds were just one set matches and I got a free tennis lesson from this kid who I refer to still as 'Mr Tennis'. I called him this because he was the best player I had seen, way better than all of the kids I had hit against at Junior Club on Saturday mornings. This guy was a player who actually knew tactics and how to play someone like me who could get a ball in but didn't have a clue how to win a point. 6-0 to 'Mr Tennis'.
What disappointed me more than the loss was his rather cocky way of strutting around after the win and his official 'postmortem' of our match to his mates. I had gone up to the board to see when my doubles match was to be played and I heard him say that 'Thompson's weak'.
This was possibly my first real indication that I was playing a sport that was more than just a physical outing. It was a personality war, an ego battle, a way to gain a mental edge over somebody and it wasn't just confined to the tennis court. My way of thinking was that it was an opportunity to have 'something' over somebody after a win, sort of like owning a part of them, perhaps their mind.
It was starting to make sense to me as i watched 'Mr Tennis' strut around as a group of others would follow him, like a bunch of ducklings following their mother. This guy seemed to have an aura about him but I didn't know why, after all he was just a fairly big kid who could hit a tennis ball well with an old wooden racket. Confusing.
Being at your first ever tennis tournament gives you a view on the game that will probably stay with you forever, good or bad. Mine was bad. I didn't like the way the good players strutted around and hung off the back fence asking their buddies for regular score updates. I didn't like the lack of sympathy for the guys that got smashed, like me, and I didn't like the 'posse' style of hot shot players thinking they owned the place.
There was a part of tennis that I already didn't like just an hour or two into my first competition.
I recall speaking with my advanced group of players some 25 years later and telling them that if I witness the 'posse' strutting around and asking mates for scores then we would be having words.
I think they understood that it was a part of tournaments that I despised but I didn't tell them that I had seen it at my first ever competition as a kid. Unfortunately the 'posse' still exists and the modern day Coach turns a blind eye, not sure why as it reflects on their 'mentoring' skills. There's nothing wrong with a group of kids hanging out at a tournament but when they intimidate kids at the back of courts with their presence and score asking I find that disappointing.
My first ever tennis tournament was a flop, I had hit thousands of tennis balls that accounted for nothing, I had no idea how to play tennis and I hated certain aspects of the tournament scene. Whilst I was not interested in getting around at a tournament with a group of sidekicks I was interested in having another shot at 'Mr Tennis'. Perhaps that was my first sign of having an ego, a necessity for the sport of tennis.
My next year of learning the game is not clear to me but all I remember was when I turned 14 I was a much better player than the one who got belted by the big guy 12 months earlier. The Albany Open that year unfortunately did not give me my return bout against 'Mr Tennis' but the 'tennis gods' were looking after me. I drew the younger brother of 'Mr Tennis' in an early round, he was just as sure of his own importance as his older brother was. If ever there was a chance to right some wrongs of a year earlier this was it.
I don't forget too many matches or scores and I will never forget this one as I beat 'Young Mr Tennis' by a score of 6-3, I remember playing well. I made a point of walking close to this kid as he walked to his older brother and gave him the score. " You lost to Thompson" ??!! I didn't hear the reply, I kept walking, mission accomplished.
I won my age group that year and I had gotten some sweet revenge even though it was not against the guy I really wanted to beat but I had a moral victory. Tennis was a game that I knew I could play but I didn't like certain aspects of the tournament scene, I still don't.
To this day I don't ask people the score and I cringe when I see others do it, young or older players, a part of the game that should command common sense, yet it doesn't.
My earliest memories of the game were not all good but I loved playing, there was a burning desire to get better, but I needed a Coach......
Part 6 to follow....
'UNEXPLAINED'
Whilst i have a break from my early childhood chapters I ponder at the rather unusual circumstances that gave Switzerland the Davis Cup Title this year. There was more than just one situation that surely will have people talking about for quite some time in the future, especially the French.
Now the Country that we refer to commonly as 'romantic' due to it's classic country side and architectural brilliance that is the back drop for many movies is in fact France.
This part of the World is known for people to forget common sense and facts and figures regarding marriage success rates.
It is possibly home to more marriage proposals, particularly at the Eiffel Tower than anywhere else in the World. France has had a love affair with their Male Tennis Professionals for quite some time also and currently has 15 players in the top 115 money earners on the tour. The French have almost an embarrassment of riches as far as Tennis Professionals are concerned with Spain being the only other Country close to their success rate.
So as far as the Davis Cup Final that was held in Lille in the North of France on the weekend it comes as a rather large surprise that the French team did not fair better. There is a site on the Web called '145 things to do in Lille, France'. Perhaps the team Captain was more interested in doing some of these than fielding the strongest team.
Gael Monfils was the exception, a man who held two match points against Federer at the US Open in September and who troubles most players with his flair. Gael was always going to play. Jo Wilfred Tsonga has not performed well this year and his inclusion in the team over Gilles Simon, especially on current form seems to be the biggest mystery.
Simon pushed Federer all the way in Shanghai just recently as he lost by a whisker in two tie breakers. He also pushed US Open Champion Marin Cilic to 6-3 in the fifth set in their Fourth Round match.
Simon was the form player for the French team without a doubt. The decision to play Gasquet over Simon will have French tennis fans shaking their heads in disbelief for at least another week . As good as young Aussie Nick Kyrgios played at Wimbledon this year it is still hard to believe that with nine match points up for grabs the much more experienced Gasquet couldn't nail one against him.
What about the Men's Doubles ? Another mystery . Julien Benneteau and Edouard Roger-Vasselin won the French Open Title this year and made the semi finals of the year ending Tour Finals yet they did not get paired up together for the Davis Cup final. Why also would you play Gasquet in the doubles ? When was the last time you heard of Richard Gasquet troubling anyone in doubles ?
What about Michael Llodra ? There is a man who is another doubles specialist and has won three Grand Slam titles including Wimbledon with current French Davis Cup Captain Arnaud Clement. Surely even if Roger-Vasselin was injured Llodra had more doubles experience than Gasquet.
The Swiss would have been licking their lips at the thought of their two big guns Roger and Stan taking on Benneteau and Gasquet , with no disrespect leveled at Benneteau of course. They knew though that this team was not as finely tuned as they were. There could be an argument against Fed and Stan being a 'credentialed' doubles team but have you ever seen Fed play dubs ? Unbelievable.
And what about the much publicized Federer back injury ? My view on his straight sets loss to Monfils is this : Why risk the back in his first match when he still had a pivotal doubles rubber to play plus another singles ? They knew they were basically over the line if they could snatch the doubles win after Stan's opening victory. Going all out against a red hot Monfils would have been a dumb decision and possibly would have cost them the Title.
Interesting Davis Cup Final this year, that's an understatement. I think that the French Captain Clement will have plenty of time to sample those '145 things to do in Lille, France' this time next year. Somehow I can't see him retaining his current status for too much longer......
Now the Country that we refer to commonly as 'romantic' due to it's classic country side and architectural brilliance that is the back drop for many movies is in fact France.
This part of the World is known for people to forget common sense and facts and figures regarding marriage success rates.
It is possibly home to more marriage proposals, particularly at the Eiffel Tower than anywhere else in the World. France has had a love affair with their Male Tennis Professionals for quite some time also and currently has 15 players in the top 115 money earners on the tour. The French have almost an embarrassment of riches as far as Tennis Professionals are concerned with Spain being the only other Country close to their success rate.
So as far as the Davis Cup Final that was held in Lille in the North of France on the weekend it comes as a rather large surprise that the French team did not fair better. There is a site on the Web called '145 things to do in Lille, France'. Perhaps the team Captain was more interested in doing some of these than fielding the strongest team.
Gael Monfils was the exception, a man who held two match points against Federer at the US Open in September and who troubles most players with his flair. Gael was always going to play. Jo Wilfred Tsonga has not performed well this year and his inclusion in the team over Gilles Simon, especially on current form seems to be the biggest mystery.
Simon pushed Federer all the way in Shanghai just recently as he lost by a whisker in two tie breakers. He also pushed US Open Champion Marin Cilic to 6-3 in the fifth set in their Fourth Round match.
Simon was the form player for the French team without a doubt. The decision to play Gasquet over Simon will have French tennis fans shaking their heads in disbelief for at least another week . As good as young Aussie Nick Kyrgios played at Wimbledon this year it is still hard to believe that with nine match points up for grabs the much more experienced Gasquet couldn't nail one against him.
What about the Men's Doubles ? Another mystery . Julien Benneteau and Edouard Roger-Vasselin won the French Open Title this year and made the semi finals of the year ending Tour Finals yet they did not get paired up together for the Davis Cup final. Why also would you play Gasquet in the doubles ? When was the last time you heard of Richard Gasquet troubling anyone in doubles ?
What about Michael Llodra ? There is a man who is another doubles specialist and has won three Grand Slam titles including Wimbledon with current French Davis Cup Captain Arnaud Clement. Surely even if Roger-Vasselin was injured Llodra had more doubles experience than Gasquet.
The Swiss would have been licking their lips at the thought of their two big guns Roger and Stan taking on Benneteau and Gasquet , with no disrespect leveled at Benneteau of course. They knew though that this team was not as finely tuned as they were. There could be an argument against Fed and Stan being a 'credentialed' doubles team but have you ever seen Fed play dubs ? Unbelievable.
And what about the much publicized Federer back injury ? My view on his straight sets loss to Monfils is this : Why risk the back in his first match when he still had a pivotal doubles rubber to play plus another singles ? They knew they were basically over the line if they could snatch the doubles win after Stan's opening victory. Going all out against a red hot Monfils would have been a dumb decision and possibly would have cost them the Title.
Interesting Davis Cup Final this year, that's an understatement. I think that the French Captain Clement will have plenty of time to sample those '145 things to do in Lille, France' this time next year. Somehow I can't see him retaining his current status for too much longer......
Monday, 24 November 2014
'THE WALL AND THE COURT' Part 4
When the decision is made to build a tennis court on the spare block next to your house there is always going to be some teething problems. The biggest issue as far as I was concerned was the room behind the baseline, there needed to be a 'paddock'.
Bjorn Borg quite often played from ten feet behind the baseline as he waited for the ball to drop into his comfort zone. I felt the same way and I played the same way at the tender age of 13, I needed room.
The conversations with my Dad were at times frustrating ones as I pleaded my case that there was no point in building a tennis court unless there was enough room to play on it. Unfortunately with the amount of space that was available there was never going to be that paddock that I yearned for behind the baseline. I would simply have to learn to step up into the court and take it earlier, I hated the idea.
I don't remember how long the court took to be completed but I finally had a 'field of dreams' next to my house as well as a hit up wall, no excuses for not improving. The issue in my house however was the lack of practice partners available other than the wall. Dad could play golf almost to perfection and he was the local Albany Golf Club Champion and he could regularly play under par. This talent of his unfortunately was never going to help my tennis.
My Mum could play tennis though and I believe I have her to thank for there being a tennis racket in our house when I found the desire to play. Mum was a member of a local Tennis Club and I remember playing on the swings some days as she would hit against other Mums in the mid week competition.
We used to play until I got too strong for her. My sister Amanda was a good runner and hockey player but had no tennis talent whatsoever. In fact we only hit once, at the Hospital court and I still remember her first shot going over the fence ! Amanda was never going to be part of my practice schedule.
Between hitting with Mum on the court and Dad throwing me balls some days to warm me up before Junior Club plus many hours on the wall I received plenty of tennis. My house was a place that I can honestly say was a 'field of dreams' as it had almost everything I needed as far as tennis was concerned.
If I could have wished for one thing back then when I was learning the game it would have been to have had a neighbor who could play well who could train me on a daily basis. It's one thing having a court next to your house, it's another to have handy practice partners in the same street. I was a typical kid who simply wanted everything to be perfect for my new past time.
As a famous quote from Vince Lombardi once suggested "Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence". That was me , I wanted the whole package deal to be within touching distance, typical kid with high aspirations.
The garage wall wasn't actually my first location of hitting at my house, that place was a wall at the rear of the house that now overlooks the court. I still remember trying to hit the wall perfectly hoping it would bounce up on the grass for me to play another shot. It rarely ever worked as the grass was too soft and the brickwork didn't allow for a perfect strike, it was frustrating.
The reason I moved to the garage was because one day my sister had words with me over my continual loud cursing as the ball would refuse to come back to where I required it. I was a kid in need of a place to play a game that for some unknown reason I felt I had to, it just seemed right. That's the thing about tennis, you don't know why you like it because some sports are a whole lot easier to play.
I still believe that tennis is a game that challenges your mind more than your body and perhaps a tennis player at any level is a person who aspires to solve a problem. Tennis is a game full of problems and it is up to each player to work through them until they find the right answers.
That's why I 'employed' both Borg and Wilander at different stages in my mind to help me with the many questions I was asking of the game......
Part 5 to follow
Bjorn Borg quite often played from ten feet behind the baseline as he waited for the ball to drop into his comfort zone. I felt the same way and I played the same way at the tender age of 13, I needed room.
The conversations with my Dad were at times frustrating ones as I pleaded my case that there was no point in building a tennis court unless there was enough room to play on it. Unfortunately with the amount of space that was available there was never going to be that paddock that I yearned for behind the baseline. I would simply have to learn to step up into the court and take it earlier, I hated the idea.
I don't remember how long the court took to be completed but I finally had a 'field of dreams' next to my house as well as a hit up wall, no excuses for not improving. The issue in my house however was the lack of practice partners available other than the wall. Dad could play golf almost to perfection and he was the local Albany Golf Club Champion and he could regularly play under par. This talent of his unfortunately was never going to help my tennis.
My Mum could play tennis though and I believe I have her to thank for there being a tennis racket in our house when I found the desire to play. Mum was a member of a local Tennis Club and I remember playing on the swings some days as she would hit against other Mums in the mid week competition.
We used to play until I got too strong for her. My sister Amanda was a good runner and hockey player but had no tennis talent whatsoever. In fact we only hit once, at the Hospital court and I still remember her first shot going over the fence ! Amanda was never going to be part of my practice schedule.
Between hitting with Mum on the court and Dad throwing me balls some days to warm me up before Junior Club plus many hours on the wall I received plenty of tennis. My house was a place that I can honestly say was a 'field of dreams' as it had almost everything I needed as far as tennis was concerned.
If I could have wished for one thing back then when I was learning the game it would have been to have had a neighbor who could play well who could train me on a daily basis. It's one thing having a court next to your house, it's another to have handy practice partners in the same street. I was a typical kid who simply wanted everything to be perfect for my new past time.
As a famous quote from Vince Lombardi once suggested "Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence". That was me , I wanted the whole package deal to be within touching distance, typical kid with high aspirations.
The garage wall wasn't actually my first location of hitting at my house, that place was a wall at the rear of the house that now overlooks the court. I still remember trying to hit the wall perfectly hoping it would bounce up on the grass for me to play another shot. It rarely ever worked as the grass was too soft and the brickwork didn't allow for a perfect strike, it was frustrating.
The reason I moved to the garage was because one day my sister had words with me over my continual loud cursing as the ball would refuse to come back to where I required it. I was a kid in need of a place to play a game that for some unknown reason I felt I had to, it just seemed right. That's the thing about tennis, you don't know why you like it because some sports are a whole lot easier to play.
I still believe that tennis is a game that challenges your mind more than your body and perhaps a tennis player at any level is a person who aspires to solve a problem. Tennis is a game full of problems and it is up to each player to work through them until they find the right answers.
That's why I 'employed' both Borg and Wilander at different stages in my mind to help me with the many questions I was asking of the game......
Part 5 to follow
Tuesday, 18 November 2014
'SOME MORE STATS'
The ATP World Tour Finals in London were a bit of a fizzer really, way too many one sided results and the much anticipated final between the best two didn't even take place. After the US Open the entire Tennis World were talking about 'the changing of the guard'.
Could it just have been a 'blip' on the radar in World Tennis that has now been corrected and viewing is now back to 'normal transmission' ?
Kei Nishikori however proved that he may just be the player to watch as he nailed Murray in straight sets. He obviously has the repertoire of shots to trouble the top 4 as he won two matches and took a set from Djokovic in their Semi Final.
That particular match though proved that it's one thing to take a set from the World Number 1, the other is to sustain that level of play. Nishikori failed to win a game in the third set of that match.
Thomas Berdych won one match , against an out of sorts Marin Cilic who was by all reports injured, but the heaviness of his two losses are surely something of concern. To win just two games against Wawrinka and only four against Djokovic surely proves there is a huge gap between himself and the players ahead of him. It's not to say that Thomas can't play tennis, he hits it hard and well but his game plan surely needs a 'tweak'.
There was a lot of talk about Andy Murray and how he has 'gone missing' but let's put his efforts into perspective also. Andy had to play a lot of tennis just to qualify for this Championship and he won two titles to sneak in, it was a huge effort just to get there.
I personally believe that he was just plain tired as he probably played more matches than any other player in the lead up to the Tour Finals.
If Roger's win against Nishikori was anything to go by well it may just have been a classic final match against Djokovic. All base liners hate being rushed and Federer knows just how to put them off their game. As well as Kei has been playing he won just 5 games against Federer.
A straight sets win to Federer over Novak in Shanghai last month proved that his game upsets the base line rhythm of the current World Number 1.
At least the Semi's of this event saw some good tennis as until then it was all pretty much one way traffic from the top 2. In fact Djokovic and Federer gave up just 22 games in a total of six matches between them leading up to the semi's, Novak 9 and Federer 13. Surely this is way too one sided for anyone's liking and almost defies logic.
I have never seen so many one sided results as what this year's Tour Finals produced and if anything I enjoyed watching the Doubles highlights more than the singles. Sure the Bryan Brothers won again but there are no 'sure things' in Men's Doubles now days and the quality of teams now are very high. Any team in the Top 10 is beatable.
Jonny Mac suggested just recently that Doubles should be scrapped from the Tour , interesting comment from a man who won around 70 odd Doubles Tournaments.
The Singles in Men's World Tennis is still fairly predictable, the Men's Doubles is still a 'raffle'. Hopefully one day we will see it all even up, it will make viewing this great game just a little more interesting......
*** FOOTNOTE*** The Paribas Masters in Paris just recently saw 7 of the top 8 seeded players make it to the last 8. All too predictable .
Could it just have been a 'blip' on the radar in World Tennis that has now been corrected and viewing is now back to 'normal transmission' ?
Kei Nishikori however proved that he may just be the player to watch as he nailed Murray in straight sets. He obviously has the repertoire of shots to trouble the top 4 as he won two matches and took a set from Djokovic in their Semi Final.
That particular match though proved that it's one thing to take a set from the World Number 1, the other is to sustain that level of play. Nishikori failed to win a game in the third set of that match.
Thomas Berdych won one match , against an out of sorts Marin Cilic who was by all reports injured, but the heaviness of his two losses are surely something of concern. To win just two games against Wawrinka and only four against Djokovic surely proves there is a huge gap between himself and the players ahead of him. It's not to say that Thomas can't play tennis, he hits it hard and well but his game plan surely needs a 'tweak'.
There was a lot of talk about Andy Murray and how he has 'gone missing' but let's put his efforts into perspective also. Andy had to play a lot of tennis just to qualify for this Championship and he won two titles to sneak in, it was a huge effort just to get there.
I personally believe that he was just plain tired as he probably played more matches than any other player in the lead up to the Tour Finals.
If Roger's win against Nishikori was anything to go by well it may just have been a classic final match against Djokovic. All base liners hate being rushed and Federer knows just how to put them off their game. As well as Kei has been playing he won just 5 games against Federer.
A straight sets win to Federer over Novak in Shanghai last month proved that his game upsets the base line rhythm of the current World Number 1.
At least the Semi's of this event saw some good tennis as until then it was all pretty much one way traffic from the top 2. In fact Djokovic and Federer gave up just 22 games in a total of six matches between them leading up to the semi's, Novak 9 and Federer 13. Surely this is way too one sided for anyone's liking and almost defies logic.
I have never seen so many one sided results as what this year's Tour Finals produced and if anything I enjoyed watching the Doubles highlights more than the singles. Sure the Bryan Brothers won again but there are no 'sure things' in Men's Doubles now days and the quality of teams now are very high. Any team in the Top 10 is beatable.
Jonny Mac suggested just recently that Doubles should be scrapped from the Tour , interesting comment from a man who won around 70 odd Doubles Tournaments.
The Singles in Men's World Tennis is still fairly predictable, the Men's Doubles is still a 'raffle'. Hopefully one day we will see it all even up, it will make viewing this great game just a little more interesting......
*** FOOTNOTE*** The Paribas Masters in Paris just recently saw 7 of the top 8 seeded players make it to the last 8. All too predictable .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)