' THE TOWEL, NECESSITY OR HABIT' ?

There is no way in the World that a tennis player requires a towel handed to them after each point by a poor little ball kid who actually signed up to chase tennis balls and not a pro who keeps pointing to his towel. How did this ridiculous habit even start and who let it happen ? ! Talk about pampered indeed.

I watched Groth ( who does sweat profusely ) sometime ago ask for the towel at an Australian tournament after each point he played and one thing occurred to me, it was a habit not a necessity. Let me elaborate. Groth asked for his towel after being aced after towelling off just moments earlier at the end of the previous point. 

Sure he won't stop sweating once he's started if he is that sort of person however a sweat band surely can do the job on the ace points as opposed to asking the ball boy to keep running the towel his way. 

To me it does nothing for the sport, in fact it gives it a prima donna type of aura as sweating and sport go together, it's like bacon and eggs. I don't see the big guns like Murray, Federer, Rafa and Novak going for the towel after each point. Sure Rafa has his funny habits however getting ball boys to run a towel to him after each point is not one of them. 

Roger simply uses his sweatband to wipe away the flow from his brow. McEnroe used to use his sleeve, Cash had a towel on his hip and Borg, well I don't believe he sweated at all, he was from another planet.

Let ball kids do their jobs, let them chase tennis balls and let the pros chase their own towels. If that means that they use all their time in between points risking a time violation then so be it but don't give other professional sport people the ammunition to call tennis a sport for the pampered......

'JUST A THOUGHT FROM GT'

I have always wondered why on earth Pro Tennis players receive new balls after seven games because surely those balls are still rather hittable after those seven games. To me all it really does is give guys like Karlovic, Querry and Isner even more ammunition for their already ridiculously fearsome delivery.
Let's look at the average Saturday at your local tennis club, new balls at 1 pm, still in reasonable shape albeit either a little fluffier if played on synthetic grass or a little worse for wear if played on a hard court. So what's my view ?
Well as always I have a theory on what I believe should in fact transpire in a tennis match remembering of course that it is the same conditions for both players. New balls each set, nothing more, nothing less.
At least that way if it gets to a tie breaker between Isner and Karlovic it may just come down to the return instead of the serve which when you think about it is far from a spectacle for the crowd. Ace, unplayable serve, Ace, Ace, Ace, unplayable serve, pretty ordinary tennis for the public who pay good money to see the ball hit over the net more than twice during a point. Call me old fashioned but I love a good rally in tennis. A barrage of aces and unplayable serves will not wear a ball out like long arduous rallies so giving the big servers new pills after seven games really is not helping the sport become entertaining.
So what of two baseliners ? Should they receive new balls after seven games ? Well maybe they have a more solid case for it to happen however a certain style obviously cannot dictate a ruling in tennis so the rules must not favour one or the other. Baseliners may argue that their style will in fact warrant new tennis balls every seven games however it may just come down to tactics if each player knew that each set was to start from scratch with a new batch of furry things in a tin.
I firmly believe tennis players are pampered way too much and watching a pro dig for a new racket to go with the new balls even if that racket has being doing magic things thus far defies logic. New set, new balls, toughen up, spare a thought for the club player who is lucky to see one set of new balls each week let alone each seven games.
Allow for tactical matches as opposed to adding gunpowder to some already heavy artillery, just a thought......

' WORTH A READ'

I had a lesson recently with a teenager who had spent around five or so years playing tennis in various programs around the State as he and his family moved around a bit. He spoke to me about wanting to improve his technique so we hit a few balls and then I brought him up close to the net.
" Show me how you would treat this ball thanks buddy " as I dropped a ball in front of him nice and low about half way between the net and the service box. He netted the first three balls that didn't even look like clearing the net. We tried again, 'Just a little more height on your follow through mate, let's clear it this time, nothing fancy, not too much pace".
Net, net, net and net again on the next four balls I drop fed to him. " What would you say is the problem with your forehand Champ" ? as I asked the obvious. 'Not sure, maybe my grip'. So we had a look at his grip which wasn't totally incorrect but we made a slight adjustment then I fed another five balls to his forehand and he cleared the net just once however his shot went long.
Here's what was going on. The kid had never been shown how to loop a ball into court. All he knew was how to drive it hard with a net clearance of a bee's proverbial. The kid had no idea on topspin or how to take the pace off the ball and simply roll it into play and he had been playing for around five years.
"Have you ever had a one on one lesson mate ? "  'No, just group lessons'. So as usual I did the sums on the whole thing. What is happening in many programs is rather obvious, too many kids in a lesson, kids running around looking busy but no real substance to the sessions and definitely no work on technique. I asked the kid whether he had been shown how to abbreviate a shot, you know, break it down into parts and his reply was 'no' again.
Sure it's a requirement for a kid to have a fun session , run around and come off the court saying 'That was great fun Dad' ,but surely part of those sessions must be about slowing the tempo down and at least looking at the mechanics of a shot. Or are some coaches worried about boring a kid to tears ?
Are gimmicks taking over from learning ? I asked this particular student to throw me a few balls just as I did to him and I showed him how to simply roll a ball into play without the drive type of motion that he thought was the ONLY way to hit a tennis ball. I broke the shot down into parts and even started with holding the racket up near the throat to prove I could hit a ball into play with plenty of clearance and not so much as a racket handle to help me.
I also hit a few balls over with just my hand as he threw the balls to me. I struck the ball with the palm of my hand and proved that I could also hit topspin without a racket. ( Sorry, maybe a gimmick there ) I wanted him to see the motion that was required to come up on a tennis ball from underneath it to create spin.
He gave it a go himself and actually had some success with it which I was not surprised about because I have always found that hitting a tennis shot in parts is how to build technique. Tennis teaching to me is all about thinking outside the square and not necessarily following programs that look great yet miss the mark as far as technique building is concerned.
I still am rather bemused by certain programs in tennis that are a total waste of time yet are seen by some parents in particular as a program of substance for their child. Forget the 10 or 12 student classes, total waste of time once again and find something that has a bit of bite to it like a program that explains the game in detail at an affordable price.....
Hang on GT, that may just make way too much sense.....
Heading to the Wheat belt again this weekend to spread the word on the game, you know the word that explains the sport of tennis without all the glossy stuff that seems to be associated with the sport now days.....
See you all in a few days
Regards GT

'WORK THIS OUT' ( YMER BROTHERS )

I have always been fond of Swedish tennis as most of you who read this site are well aware though there is a current tournament being played in Stockholm that has two rising Swedish stars defying all kinds of logic.
Two brothers by the name of Mikael and Elias Ymer have made it through to the final of the Mens Doubles event at age 18 and 20 though that's not the only thing that I find remarkable about these two players.
It has been well documented that the average age of a current successful male tennis pro is around 25-27 years of age but what I find so infectious about these two brothers is their rankings. They have a combined current World doubles ranking of over 2000.
Mikael actually does not own a current ranking in doubles though his career high is 1387 which he achieved last year. Elias is currently ranked 954 in Mens doubles so if you do the sums on all of that you should be smart enough to work out that these two really have no place in a World tour final yet they have already taken out teams that have made it inside the World top 20 and even higher.
How is that possible ? Heart. These two are playing in their home town tennis tournament and they are playing at a level that is in fact well above what their rankings suggest.
It reminds me of Rafa at 14 and 15 playing practice sets against his mentor Carlos Moya which did two things, it took Rafa to another level but it also made Moya a better player as he was well aware of a kid breathing down his neck. Does a World number 1 appreciate a teenager belting regular winners past him with almost an attitude that has arrogance written all over it ? It is well documented that Rafa and Carlos made each other better, despite their age and difference in experience.
Whether the Ymer brothers win the doubles event in Stockholm tonight is almost irrelevant, the fact that they are defying tennis logic by even winning a round let alone making it to the final is inspiring for any budding tennis professional.
For the record, Elias has earned just shy of 100 grand so far this year but Mikael, well, he has pocketed what most council rubbish truck drivers take home in a month, 4 grand. Maybe that's before tax.
Silly sport tennis, it keeps dishing up stories that keep guys like myself scratching their heads in bewilderment at just what makes sense and what doesn't. It's a sport that can defy logic or it can have us 'experts' saying things like 'yeah that was always going to happen'........

****** FOR THE RECORD******
The Swedish duo won the final against Pavic and Venus by the score of 6-1, 6-1 in 51 minutes. What planet were those two on do you think ??
Quite remarkably the Ymer brothers came back from 6-9 in the final set super tie breaker to win it 11-9 in the first round.
Splitting around 30,000 Euros may just pay for a few expenses for a couple of battlers who have earned what Federer probably has as loose change in his car glove box.
Swedish tennis hasn't had a lot to smile about in recent years, these two lads may just be the start of something special once again.....

'HEY JIM, JUST CHECKING'...........

In case you haven't read much on this site of mine I will reiterate a point that I made after the 2016 Australian Open after I took exception to a comment made by 'Mr Egotistical' himself, Jim Courier.
During the Federer/ Goffin match in the Round of 16 Jim came up with a theory as to why David Goffin of Belgium was ranked so high and quite frankly I found it both hilarious and insulting all in one.
Now you are probably aware of my views on certain Commentators of the Tennis World and why I don't like many of them and it's because of their ridiculous way of taking sides or refusing to even acknowledge a player. One at Wimbledon this year came out with "I don't know anything about this player" which I found to be rather confusing because if you take 5 minutes out of your busy schedule it's easy to look up.
You see on the ATP World Tour site there is that much information about players that it's easy to find out in probably less than 5 minutes what certain players like, dislike, their rankings history, prize money and where they reside. If I was a commentator and about to call a match then I would use my initiative, look up the site, do some homework before the match and perhaps even bluff my way through a few things.
'I see David Goffin has made over one and a half million dollars already this year, his Father is in fact a Tennis Coach in his home town in Belgium and he was voted by his fellow peers 'the comeback player of 2014'.
Now if a commentator doesn't already know this sort of stuff about a player such as Goffin well they really have no excuses because it's all there in writing, all you have to do is both use your initiative and press a few buttons, simple really. Back to Courier, Mr Egotistical.
At this year's Aussie Open Mr Ego felt that it was his duty to explain to the public why David Goffin was ranked World number 16 and he was far from complimentary about it saying among other things that he received ranking points from Davis Cup matches that held no significance. Well Jim it's like this buddy, Mr Goffin is now ranked World number 14, he did even get as high as number 11, so how did that happen then ey ? Did he bluff his way to that number ??!
You cannot fake a World Tennis ranking unless maybe it's in the Futures events where guys are ranked down in the seven and eight hundreds for example but on the World Tour it is basically an impossibility to hold a 'fake' ranking. Try telling that to Mr Ego himself.
I touched on the Jim Courier book reading saga in an old post where I relayed some facts about this particular person bringing the sport of tennis into disrepute. This all came about when Jim thought it would be a good thing to read a book at the change of ends, a book that had nothing to do with tennis and which had arrogance written all over it.
I believe that Mr Courier was told by certain people in tennis that this antic was not to be done again due to the look that it gave the sport. If every tennis player sat down and read a book at the change of ends it would look like a children's nursery rhyme session with the only thing missing being the ball kids huddled around the offending player with big cheesy grins waiting for the moment when 'Itsy bitsy spider crawled up the water spout'.
Jim Courier is far from perfect yet he makes out that he is a man of great integrity and who never put a foot wrong, I tend to dispute that and I take exception to him bagging current players and their rankings. Sure I may have had a dig here and there regarding certain players however it has never been over their World rankings, probably just their antics. A player is a number for a reason, not because he wears fancy clothes.
Personally I think Jim Courier should apologise to the little guy from Belgium because it was uncalled for and lacked substance yet that's Jim Courier for you, full of his own self importance. Silly sport tennis, full of silly egotistical people......

'TENNIS SCORING, GIVE IT A TWEAK'

The way that Mens Doubles on the World Tour is now structured leaves many teams wondering about the what if's and maybe's probably more than ever before in the history of the sport. Basically it is cut throat tennis at one set all as the super tie break system kicks in to decide a winner in all tournaments apart from the Grand Slams.
Doubles is a tough way to make a living no doubt about it due to the evenness of all teams competing with no real stand out combinations. Even the Bryan brothers have come back to the field and the chances of another team winning 100 plus titles I believe is a thing of the past.
The recent championship in the US at the Winstom- Salem Open typifies just how tough the two on two format is as the round of 16 matches provided no less than five out of eight results decided by a third set breaker. In the quarter finals three of the four matches were also decided by a super tie breaker and two of those were decided by the score of 10-8. No time for nerves.
The pairing of Henri Kontinen and Guillermo Garcia- Lopez was one that had no credentials whatsoever as it was the first time they had played together so to actually combine together effectively proves just how talented this team is. Their opponents in the final were Paes and Begemann, two players with vastly different backgrounds.
Leander Paes is possibly one of the greatest Mens doubles players of all time as well as one of the most successful Mixed doubles players in the history of the sport. Paes however could be competitive with my Mum and she doesn't play much now days at age 78.
His pairing with the German Andre Begemann was interesting to say the least however it just goes to show that a player like Paes is also generous, Begemann is ranked World number 140 in doubles. Playing with someone with a ranking that low has generosity written all over it.
One of Begemann's recent Challenger event's saw him and his 101 ranked partner have a win at 11-9 in the third set breaker over two guys with a combined ranking of over 600 which begs the question. What if more guys like Leander Paes combined with lower ranked players to compete on the main tour to bring their level up with the best in the World ? Would it speed up the improvement process ? Silly question GT.
So to the final at Winstom-Salem. At a set up Paes and Begemann lead 6-1 in the second set tie breaker and somehow managed to lose seven points straight. The match went into a super tie breaker which the pair from Spain and Finland won 10 points to 8 which also asks many questions but one more than anything else.
Is being match point down or rather several match points down simply a statistic that can be overcome with a mind set that owns no fear and an ability to simply keep swinging whilst ignoring the score board ?
I once wrote a post about Andre Agassi where his match at the French Open in 1988 against Mats Wilander, my hero, would own a moment that possibly has never been replicated. After winning the first set 6-4 Andre turned to his player's box and openly said 'I thought it was 5-3'.
I don't believe that it was arrogance, I firmly think that it was a player in the zone, not playing a scoreboard, just swinging his racket and letting the points accumulate. Could it be taught to a new player of the sport ? How could you teach that ? I don't believe it can, perhaps you may be born with that gift but it would be a tough one to learn.
In 2013 at the Monte Carlo Championships another first time pairing of Zimonjic and Benneteau saved seven match points against the Bryan brothers to win 14-12 in the third set tie breaker. Maybe there is an element of 'no fear' with first time pairings as after all what have they got to lose ? There is no reputation on the line.
Personally I love the format of Mens doubles in World tennis as it takes away the 'ho hum' type of feeling to matches that can drag on to say 15-13 in the fifth set and leave a player as cannon fodder for their next opponent.
Isner and Mahut proved the theory wrong that 'a match has to end sometime'. Theirs took three days at Wimbledon to complete which not only stuffs a tournament around but also stuffs a player out.
Tennis needs a bit of a tweak just as they have done in doubles, it requires a spice up, a change of format just as twenty twenty cricket has revived the sport in general. Tennis rewards the guys prepared to stay out there all day, not necessarily the shot makers who are the more entertaining ones to watch most of the time.
Two sets all in singles, bring in the Super tie breaker, add some life to a sport that needs to move ahead just as other sports have done by tweaking the format.
Remember the crowd also has to go home at a respectable hour....... 

'A HAIRCUT AND A FOREHAND'

 Not sure how it became so popular but this particular post of mine gets a run in many Countries, in fact if you look up the famous quote by Ivan Lendl it comes up as a number 1 on Google. I always had a dream of being World Number 1 however I didn't expect it to be over something I wrote.
I one day hope that the great man Andre Agassi himself sends me a thankyou email regarding what I put together out of respect for him and the circumstances surrounding the Lendl quote.
Just for the hell of it I will repost it as I see that someone in Brussels just tuned in and had a read of that particular post on this site.
G'day mate, hope all is well over your side of the World.....

Written September 2014

If ever there was a famous quote in World Tennis it had to be the one from Czech Champion Ivan Lendl in 1987 when asked at a press conference what he thought of a young Andre Agassi.
 The Stratton Mountain Tournament in the US played in August of '87 saw the emergence of a 17 year old kid who wore denim tennis shorts and wore his hair rather long. The kid would go on to win every Grand Slam available and became the World's best player in 1995.
Andre Agassi entered Stratton Mountain as a player ranked 90 in a field of 64 players so naturally he had to receive a bit of a helping hand by the tournament committee, a Wild Card was granted.
 In the first round he faced American Luke Jensen , a player ranked number 415 but who could serve with both his left and right arms , now that's clever.
Andre struggled past Jensen in three sets then set up a second round meeting with '87 Wimbledon Champion, Aussie Pat Cash. On paper this match looked rather one sided however Agassi found a way to sneak past Cash in two breakers , people were starting to take notice.
The round of 16 saw Andre take out American Chip Hooper in three, then a quarter final win against countryman Joey Rive in straight had him up against World number 1 Ivan Lendl. Now this match was entertaining however I have only seen extended highlights of it , would love to watch the entire match one day.
This match saw Andre running around his backhand at any given opportunity to belt his already huge forehand back at Lendl who at times looked rather confused at the kid's ability. The big Czech eventually won the match in three sets , 6-2, 5-7, 6-3 but not before being given a huge fright by a skinny 17 year old with flash shorts.
The press conference after the match was one that produced this chapter's title as Lendl gave his opinion on the new kid on the block. Looking back I suppose Andre could've taken it as a compliment as it was rather obvious that Ivan rated the forehand highly, perhaps not so much the haircut.
A year earlier at the same tournament John McEnroe beat Andre at the quarter final stage in straight sets but paid him a huge compliment. Whilst I do not have the transcript in front of me he told a press conference that a winner by Agassi from his forehand was the hardest shot he had ever had hit against him. Fair endorsement for a 16 year old. 
Some people knock Agassi because he admitted taking drugs but they obviously haven't read all the detail.
 I don't remember the last time a recreational drug has been proven to enhance any sportsman's performance, Andre included. At the time that he tried it he stated he wasn't enjoying the game and his ranking had dropped. I believe everyone is entitled to a little 'time out'.
Andre Agassi didn't have to tell anyone yet he was big enough to admit he took something, I think that shows integrity.........