I never said he was great, just that's he's not a negative player. If he was he'd be much better at Wimbledon. You are right, he's made more french open 4th rounds than wimbledon 4th rounds.
His return of serve is awful, can't do crap on grass.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Last edited by GirlySports; 09-02-2018 at 05:29 PM.
"His return of serve is awful, but he's still a ranked player for most of his career" = anti-tennis. Remember anti-tennis is not the same as negative tennis. Anti-tennis just means he can't rally against anything but average players, but his serve keeps him afloat. Negative tennis means being a backboard. Negative tennis is definitely worse, but I'd still rather watch women's tennis than the men's version of either negative or anti-tennis.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
We'll have to disagree. Serving is part of tennis so you can't dismiss it as being cheap. Having that weapon is an advantage like speed is an advantage. Isner makes the most of his ability.
Guys like Seppi playing Shapo the other day are frustrating. Seppi is 6 foot 3 and serves just to start the point.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Maybe others here who watch more tennis than me can comment on it, but to me Raonic has only marginally improved over the last 5 years or so. I know Isner is good and has been playing well but you would think Raonic at this point in his career would be able to easily handle a 33 year old Isner. Just seems that he has not added enough to his game since he was 22-23. I guess injuries could play a role but it just sucks to see him really stagnate as a player.
Just my two cents, but I would say that Milos has improved quite a bit if we are using that last five years as a benchmark. His movement is way better than it used to be and his one-handed slice backhand is as well. His two-handed backhand is always going to be wonky. His forehand and serve are obviously his strengths.
The other thing is I don't think Isner is getting enough credit, he has been able to improve his game at a time when many guys are struggling to hang on to relevance. I've heard that Isner watches his diet like a hawk and is committed to fitness and those two facts along with some luck enable him to be playing some very good tennis at the age of 33.
Of course, it didn't take long for Cathal Kelly to write an article trashing Milos - I'm not going to provide a link, you can find it quite easily if interested.
I walked away to get a snack and missed everything.
And from a bit earlier today...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis
Watched some of Maria's match last night against Ostapenko. And yeah, as I continue to reiterate, the women's game is in massive, massive trouble. Maria probably gets double bageled if she plays like that against Serena, yet she easily beat Ostapenko. I can see Serena winning four more majors, having another kid, then coming back and winning two or three more. It's also why we probably don't give up on Genie, the women's game is so pathetic she just needs two great weeks and she could win a major.
It's time for my yearly lament on how much I miss Kim Clijsters. Loved her tenacity, pace, and most of all, her sportsmanship. She was good at everything and never gave up on a ball. I often wondered how her groin and quads were still intact after many of those sliding splits she would make.
I really did enjoy that era (Henin, Davenport, Sharapova, Williams sisters) - perhaps more than Steffi, Martina, Monica, just because I had a better appreciation for tennis.
I am enjoying following Serena's current journey and Petra Kvitova's special comeback. You see glimpses like Stephens, and I'm keeping an eye on Vondrousova, but it's tough to get invested in the women's game at the moment. Too many flashes in the pan.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mango For This Useful Post:
Lmao, anyone watching Cilic match? He was taking a very long time to serve and the time clock was at zero, the umpire said on the mic in a really loud voice, “what are you waiting for?” It was a humorous moment, the commentators were laughing.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bigtmac19 For This Useful Post:
Lmao, anyone watching Cilic match? He was taking a very long time to serve and the time clock was at zero, the umpire said on the mic in a really loud voice, “what are you waiting for?” It was a humorous moment, the commentators were laughing.
Hopefully, there is video of that exchange, I'll take a look.
