I recently read a very interesting comment on ATP website attributed to Rafael Nadal about the difference in Tennis today and Tennis in the 1990s. Nadal is quoted as saying “Personally, to watch a Pete Sampras versus Goran Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable. It's not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet. It was less eye-catching than what we do now. Everyone enjoys the tennis we play much more. I am not saying we are playing better tennis, just more enjoyable tennis. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve."
That’s a very interesting comment from a current number 1 player in the world. It is also a comment either by design or not, which denigrates a whole era of Tennis. Not only that, but for the younger generation, it would paint the impression that every player from that time period were just good at serving and nothing else.
Now for slightly older Tennis fans who have been watching Tennis for more than ten years, Tennis was a much more diverse sport than it is today. The irony here is that Nadal is very much a product of the modern game and has been able to take advantage of the changes that administrators made to Tennis in the early 2000s.
First of all let’s mention some of the famous names who won Grand Slam titles in the 1980s and 1990s. How about Ivan Lendl, Pat Cash, Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Jim Courier, Andre Agassi, Mats Wilander, Pete Sampras, Pat Rafter, Gustavo Kuerten, Sergei Brugera, Michael Chang, Richard Krajicek. Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Carlos Moya. The first thing that comes to mind is the very diverse styles of all of these players. You have pure serve and volleyers in Pat Cash, Stefan Edberg, Pat Rafter and Richard Krajicek. Then you have aggressive baseliners in Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, Andre Agassi. Claycourt specialists such as Kuerten, Moya and Brugera although both Kuerten and Moya were very good on hard courts. Mats Wilander and Michael Chang were very good counter punchers. Sampras and Becker were very good all court players.
That is quite a big difference to today where most players play the same way and there is not much variety at the top of mens Tennis. Roger Federer is a product of the previous era but most players today grind their way to victory, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic are two examples of that. Rafael Nadal has greatly benefited from a few factors that changed Tennis.
First, there has been the continual slowing down of the Wimbledon surface that started in 1995 with the change of seed in the grass. The courts became harder and higher bouncing as result. Then there was the systematic decline of indoor carpet tournaments on the ATP tour. Tournaments such as Philadelphia and Stuttgart were taken off the calendar, whilst the year end ATP finals and Paris Bercy were changed from an indoor carpet court to an indoor hard court which usually plays slower and higher bouncing. The Australian Open changed their surface from rebound ace which had its own unique characteristics to a conventional medium paced hard court which means players don’t have to worry about adapting to a different surface from other conventional hard courts as in the past.
Not only have we seen a change to surfaces over the last 10 years, there has also been a change to the composition of the balls in many tournaments including Wimbledon, organisers are opting for bigger and heavier Tennis balls which aid return of serve and rallies more than the servers. This change was brought about by the International Tennis Federation (ITF) in 2001. This metamorphosis can be seen in Roger Federer’s game over the years, Federer changed from an attacking volley player to attacking baseliner to stay ahead in the game. Tennis racquets and strings advancement have been discussed a lot in recent times but the changes to balls and surfaces have been in many ways more important as many players still use natural gut and many players used synthetic strings and more flexible racquets 10 years ago.
It has been bemoaned many times by Tennis fans on forums and ex players that today’s top professionals are not able to volley with any real consistency or panache, and that there are no contrast of styles at the top of the game. It’s interesting that Nadal mentioned Sampras v Ivanisevic as a match up because Sampras said in his book “A Champions Mind” that his rivalry with Ivanisevic was a bad matchup. Nadal could have chosen many other match ups from that era which produced stunning Tennis which is still talked about today. There’s the premium rivalry between Agassi and Sampras. Sampras and Courier at the Australian and French Opens. Edberg v Becker at Wimbledon and Lendl v Becker. The five set battles between Agassi and Rafter at Wimbledon and Australian Open is also one for the ages.
As far as attacking players go, Nadal could have mentioned the great rivalries between Sampras and Becker and Sampras and Rafter. The 2000 Wimbledon final between Sampras and Rafter was a great match, with Rafter employing his deadly kick serve and volleying ability and Sampras hitting all of those incredible return winners and passing shots. Then you had the Sampras v Becker rivalry which always served up a combination of incredible rallies, athleticism and net play, especially the 5 set 1996 ATP (World Tour) final which lasted 4 hours, Tennis at its finest.
Nadal mentioned the number 1 player of the previous era, in 1998 Sampras played a tough 5 set final with Ivanisevic, then in 1999 played Andre Agassi and produced a totally different brand of Tennis of incredible skill from the baseline, considered one of the best ever individual performances in the history of the game. These things happen, in 2005 Federer produced an incredible display against Roddick in the Wimbledon final but in 2009 the final was a serve fest with 50 aces by Federer. That happened in the present era.
Many of the current players often site Sampras as one of their heroes. In an exhibition match between Sampras and Gael Monfils in San Jose in February, Monfils acted more like a fan than an opponent, even having his own photos taken with Sampras with his personal camera. Players like Tsonga and Djokovic have also sited Sampras as an inspiration. We all know by now that Federer looked up to Becker, Edberg and Sampras when he was growing up. Many of the current players would actually prefer to have the opportunity to play in faster conditions more often so they could produce an all court game and more net play, especially players like Tsonga.
Spain’s complaints to the ITF about the surface the United States plan to use in the Davis cup semi final in July shows that right now Tennis has gone too far the other way in accommodating baseline play which can be considered one dimensional. Rafael Nadal has been by far the biggest beneficiary of the slowing down of surfaces and balls in the last 10 years. This has allowed Nadal to make comments about previous eras which are wide of the mark. I certainly don’t agree with Nadal and I also think it’s time the authorities looked into reintroducing indoor carpet tournaments. They should also allow Wimbledon to play at a speed which will benefit attacking players like Tsonga, Milos Raonic and encourage a new generation of young players who can play at the net in future.
No comments:
Post a Comment