Watched these matches as a kid. Was a great honor to have Ramesh as a captain. Amazing tennis brain! Indian tennis would have benefited greatly from learning from his tactical sense.
It was a bit of a surprise India got this far. An important reason why India reached the final was that the team played 3 consecutive ties on grass, at home against argentina, against Israel and away against Australia. In Australia, India was lucky that pat cash, who won Wimbledon that year, was injured. But Sweden was a bridge too far, because it was the best tennis nation in the world at the moment, with wilander, edberg, nystrom and jarryd all top 10 players. It's unthinkable that the current Indian players can get this far.
@@WONGLER Krishnan was a beautiful player to watch, but he had a few weaknesses. Number one : he was not very fit. when he grew up, fitness was not . emphasised among Indian players. Number two : he was quite short. As a result, he never had a strong serve. Number three : he never developed a topspin backhand, which is essential for clay court tennis. In spite of all of this, he reached three quarterfinals of grand slam tournaments, and one final of the davis cup. India can only dream of players of his level at the moment...
@@vijayiyer8518 True big shock for me as a Wilander fan that that same Krishnan was able to beat Mats in the 2nd round of the Australian Open 89 very easily in 3 sets
Ramesh K has some great placements and touch but there is virtually no power in his game. Michel Chang who is built small like RK (but more wiry ) has a far more powerful game and better stamina. He was a formidable opponent to any top player of his time
Watched these matches as a kid. Was a great honor to have Ramesh as a captain. Amazing tennis brain! Indian tennis would have benefited greatly from learning from his tactical sense.
You could select some of krishnan's best points and create a video called "tennis art" . What a talent , delightful to watch , pure grace
It was a bit of a surprise India got this far. An important reason why India reached the final was that the team played 3 consecutive ties on grass, at home against argentina, against Israel and away against Australia. In Australia, India was lucky that pat cash, who won Wimbledon that year, was injured. But Sweden was a bridge too far, because it was the best tennis nation in the world at the moment, with wilander, edberg, nystrom and jarryd all top 10 players. It's unthinkable that the current Indian players can get this far.
Exactly, I am a huge german Sweden fan but Krishnan was playing one of the most beautiful shots (especially the backhand slice) I have ever seen
@@WONGLER Krishnan was a beautiful player to watch, but he had a few weaknesses. Number one : he was not very fit. when he grew up, fitness was not . emphasised among Indian players. Number two : he was quite short. As a result, he never had a strong serve. Number three : he never developed a topspin backhand, which is essential for clay court tennis. In spite of all of this, he reached three quarterfinals of grand slam tournaments, and one final of the davis cup. India can only dream of players of his level at the moment...
@@vijayiyer8518 True big shock for me as a Wilander fan that that same Krishnan was able to beat Mats in the 2nd round of the Australian Open 89 very easily in 3 sets
@@WONGLER to be fair, i think wilander lost interest in the game after 1988, which was a phenomenal year for him
@@vijayiyer8518 Exactly, he recognized that there is much more in life than just tennis
I miss NEC
easier days of tennis...serve and volley
Ramesh K has some great placements and touch but there is virtually no power in his game.
Michel Chang who is built small like RK (but more wiry ) has a far more powerful game and better stamina. He was a formidable opponent to any top player of his time
Vegeterian or little meat vs eat anything but human