Two old timers keeping it real - love the honest, no-BS commentary about the state of today's game from two former top 10 player with no agenda. This is now my favorite tennis-related channel.
I love James Blake. He's such an awesome human being. I remember James commentating at the U.S. Open in 2022 when Francis Tiafoe epically made it into the semifinals (losing to Alcaraz) by beating Nadal in the quarterfinals. After Tiafoe's quarterfinal win, James was talking about Tiafoe and it brought tears to his eyes... on national television. Wow, what a moment. I cried too. James was so proud of Francis, highlighting the often insurmountable hurdles that black Americans have to jump over to succeed in life, especially in tennis. James exposed a realness, a rawness, never seen on TV. I felt one with James and Francis and the plight of all Americans who struggle to succeed. James's words were more than tennis. His words were about life. It was beautiful. Thank you, James Blake. One more thought about Francis Tiafoe. Like many armchair quarterbacks, I sent Francis a message on Facebook after his loss to Alcaraz. To my utter surprise, Francis wrote back to me. Professional coaches, players, and nobodies like me "know" what tennis players need to do to improve. (One vexing player is Denis Shapovalov. I've never seen someone with so much talent have so little success, but that's another story.) When I wrote to Francis, I told him, with respect and grace, what needed to improve. I was convinced that if he changed this one thing about his game he'd win a major. I said that he need to stretch several hours a day. Really. That's it. I said this because when you see Francis walk, his gait his short. His bones are stiff and he's not naturally flexible. This is the way he was born. It's genetic and he can't beat himself up about it. You look at Djokovic and he can do the splits and put his legs behind his head. Apparently, he stretches several hours a day and I'm certain his stretching routine gives him a huge advantage over other players. Of course, other people critique Francis's backhand and other parts of his game which needs improvement. I focused on his stretching. What blew my mind is Francis wrote back to me, concurred with my thoughts, and thanked me for sharing them. I bow to you, Francis Tiafoe. To make a long story short, James Blake and Francis Tiafoe, you're awesome !!!
@@markaven5249 Agreed. Success is relative. The fact is, most tennis players will never win a major. If you're a tennis player and you love what you do, and make a living doing it, you're already way ahead of most people in the world. Tiafoe most likely won't win a major but this doesn't prevent him from trying, traveling the world, and smiling all the way to the bank doing it. Congrats to Tiafoe.
When did it grab ur attention? Id say Alcaraz vs Sinner has become a modern classic.. and we just had an epic between Novak and Alcaraz at the Olympics.
Tennis has improved much like film ... It's a Marvel movie now - Formulaic and all about margins. As a spectator who lived through the 90s, I agree would be nice to show case some of the faster game styles again.. Bring back carpet courts, &/or slick indoors... if even for a few weeks of the year.
Great comment about change in court speeds. I totally agree, and wish they would add some fast courts (or fast balls) to the tour. Everything plays like clay now….
Also, the homogeneous court speeds made it very easy to the Big 3 to rack up slams. No way Nadal wins Wimbledon on the old fast grass, or Fed wins French Open if it was slower.
@@johnlicciardello2389That’s a good point! Nobody really talks about that anymore.. you didn’t use to expect one guy to win every type of tournament at all..
the ATP finals in turin were incredibly fast during the last two years. becker said they were as fast as frankfurt and Stuttgart. the USO laykold surface is definitely medium fast category and bordering on fast in some outside courts, so not all surfaces ate molasses slow as they were pre 2020
Not enough players in this latest era have a decent volley. Most of them treat the net like it is the ledge at Niagara Falls. So yes, today's players are really good from the back of the court and athletic but most lack an all around game. Alcaraz is one of the few that can play well from the front and the back. Kyrgios is gifted from every part of the court. That's a guy that could have won 6-7 slams if really wanted it badly. Sinner is building a multi-faceted game as well. I have to disagree on Medvedev. He's incredible from the baseline but he didn't build his net capability enough which has held him back from winning more slams...I love watching him play nonetheless.
Kyrgios is a joke. For all that's 'gifted' about him, there's more that's 'Tragic Johnson' about him cuz he's his own worst enemy. And there have been baseliners for decades who didn't like coming to the net just like there are droves of players now who are very good to great at the net. A lot of the top 30 players play singles and doubles.
@@sharifs649 I'm not talking about serve and volley as a main tactic. I'm talking most players aren't even willing to come to net on a short ball or strong FH during a rally. Most guys don't even try to gain an edge by controlling the net in opportune moments. Novak wins by baseline only because he is that good but most other players need to play a more well rounded game. The Novak era bred way too many baseline ball bashers who have no clue how to play from the front of the court.
I completely agree with you as an older tennis fan having watched tennis for 30+ years, but I'm realizing all these younger people don't understand this at all. Nadal and Djoker very well may have been ranked lower than 30+ in 1995.
@@markaven5249Dont know about that. Blake only met Roger 3 times in slams and Blake managed to win 1 set. 2003 USO that Roddick ended up winning. 2006 where Roger defeated Roddick in the final. 2008 Aussie open that Novak won. 06 woulda been his best shot. He defeated Roddick twice that year on grass and HC but even if not then Roddick gets another slam most likely. 08 Aussie open? Novak was too strong. 03 Roddick was red hot having just won Rogers cup beating Roger and Nalby on the Way. Anyway, he would just be taking away Roddick victory if he did. Roddick woulda definitely won a handful or more without Fed though. Nadal didnt defeat Roddick and Blake in slams in that period,
It's a shame that the surfaces have changed so much. There should be more surfaces... that's something tennis could add to make each tournament unique but I get the feeling they want dominant players across all surfaces because it's easier to create a following of personality than it is of the sport as a whole.
its not just the surfaces. the USO and AO are quite fast of late (since 2020) but the tennis balls used at the AO are slower on average, and at night play extremely slow. Wimbledon uses the slowest balls on tour. But i think organizers realized conditions had slowed down too much so there was an effort to speed up play especially at the USO and ATP finals (since 2019). Becker said the surface at turin is as fast as 90s indoor carpet plus its played at altitude. so its a mixed bag. i think a few tweaks like faster type 2 balls at Wimbledon and faster balls at the Australian open will change tennis for the better. in all honesty the french open plays much faster then pre 2000 because the tennis balls are lighter (lightest among all the slams), plus the USO has the best balance of medium fast courts and type 2 tennis balls. unfortunately some indoor courts are ridiculously slow like astana, and frankly they are boring as hell to watch. some reform is definitely required
Exactly, sponsorships and celebrity is easier to create when you encourage and prop a few at the top up, ATP even pays them millions to just show up, then gives them byes in the tournaments and easier draws. This accounts for Fed, Nadal and Djoker throughout the years, gotta at least try to prop up a few and keep it consistent. Remember, at the end of the day, it's all entertainment and your players are sort of like your characters in a storybook.
@@z1az285 Also, faster balls, strings and courts would mean less injuries, something they don't talk about much. You have more knee injuries as of the last 10 years, now even the invincible Djoker is getting knee surgeries. In my opinion, racquet sports should be more about skill and a little less...at least a LITTLE less about stamina and fitness and body building.
@ServedPodcast I remember James Blake doing his early commentary right when Justin Gimelstob was still on air. Gimelstob was too hyper. Blake was calm, yet, insightful, so I liked him from the start. There were others that I liked from way back when like Patrick McEnroe back in the 80s (he's less insightful these days, I feel) and one guy who did a fantastic job (along with James) was Jimmy Arias. I wish he did more commentary. And of course, Andy has shown fantastic insights as well. Just such a relaxed interview when James is being interviewed. So chill.
@@Bambotb Is there no middle ground? Couldn't the court speed of Wimbledon be increased a little, so it's something in between what we have now and what it was like in the 90's.
the ATP finals in turin were incredibly fast during the last two years. Becker said the surface and conditions were as fast as Frankfurt and Stuttgart.
@@123a-o5d yes there is a middle ground. speed up the grass courts and take away the poly strings. you're welcome. (and also...yes...the grass was changed to a 50/50 blend around 2003 to slow down the big servers. could go maybe 30-70 etc etc. on that)
Andy roddick and James Blake I think together make two of the more well-rounded tennis analysts.... Just a good perspective and honesty which is lacking especially in somebody like a John McEnroe. 🤣🤣
Love watching both these guys play. But the courts have gotten slower and we don’t get to see the different games. I want to see the courts go back to the fast courts. Bring back the old courts
I think it’s a waste of time to compare past and present players. I will say, however, that the court surfaces are way too slow and they’ve made the balls too heavy. I’d like to see players show off their lightning quick reaction times and be able to hit winners more freely. These matches with marathon length points have become somewhat of a bore for me.
I like the baseball idea that they still use wood bats. it is better isn't it ? obviously can't go back to woodies, but controlling string technology including weave patterns could be done and maybe maybe cut the advantage top `10 guys have
Tennis is one of the few sports that is greatly impacted by advances in equipment technology, specifically the racquet. The racquets allow for more powerful shots. Strings like Nadal uses can create insane spin. So because of this, the players have had to get faster and stronger off both sides. And as Blake stated, the game can be "manipulated" with changes in the surface. It's all very homogenous now which worked in the favor of certain players like Nadal and Novak. The superfast grass or concrete no longer exists. While it's made the game "better", its' actually made the game less interesting to me and less desirable to watch.I can't think of any other sport that can be "manipulated" the way tennis has been, and not necessarily for nefarious reasons.
@@willkittwk Ever watched a really high level wiffle ball match? It's a whole other game from baseball, same rules and everything, wildly different people will be at the top.
Finally some actual real tennis knowledge being dropped. I thought I was the only one thinking all these things. It feels amazing knowing that I wasn't the only one. we really lack this stuff in the tennis world. 99% of people have no real clue of what they're talking about, and as an avid tennis player and fan you can tell. Even grand slam commentators have no real clue about Tennis and why Players play a certain way or go for a certain shot. Most of the time it's just the same typical commentators with the same kind of knowledge as the Netflix break point producers (ie. no real deep knowledge of the sport). Which is really sad.
Yep, having grown up in the 90s and early 2000s I remember the feel of a racquet from that time, and small tournaments I'd spectate in the club my dad went to, he and others had insane serves and there was a ton of serve and volleying going around, but not just that varied styles. The club had 6 clay courts and 2 hard courts, fun times, I'd hit agains the backboard like 5 hours a day at the time, you'd rent/borrow racquets out, and I'd often try out the wooden ones, the long metal ones (I assume they were from the 80s), and the 90s racquets were popular, and it all made a huge difference.
I knew Wimbledon had got slower but I did not know the French had got faster. Here is a true story from the Hamburg Masters in, I think, 2008. It is played on clay of course, and after a match on centre court a few people shovelled all the clay into wheelbarrows and removed it. What was left was a sort of hardcourt which I assume plays faster than the clay. And who was on centre court in the next match? Roger Federer. That is blatant favouritism and it shouldn't be allowed, then or now.
I think the Paris Masters was the same. Used to be very fast and Roger would never play there. Then one year they slowed it down a ton and Roger came to play.
@@johnlicciardello2389why Federer would rather play on a slow court than a fast one🤦, that makes no sense. next time don't troll and assume they changed the court just for Federer or any other player.
Fed Nadal and Djoker are definitely favored, the top few will be, because you want consistency. Roddick for example, they wanted to favor him and give him easier draws etc etc..., but Fed was around and he couldn't beat him, but still they wanted Roddick to win many slams, even the announcer after his first was like "The first one", then he never won another, yet Roddick got commercial deals, endorsements etc.... I admit I also wanted American tennis to have a new number 1, but Federer stole it away from us.
@@soheiladam7510 He's actually got a point, Federer petitioned for slower courts, too bad karma came back at him when Djoker and Nadal came along, I bet Federer wished he hadn't done that.
I have been playing since 1982, I teach the sport, and love playing it. BUT, I can't watch modern tennis. Too boring and no variety. I used to liked seeing the different styles of play. French was slow (never watched), Wimbledon was fast (love the serve-and-volley), and the US Open was an inbetween. I understand some people want to see rallies, but they slowed the ball and courts down so much for those long rallies, that matches are taking 6 hours (2012 Aussie Open with Nadal and Novak. That's inhumane to a player. And, I don't have time to watch something that long.
Those marathon matches are classics- where the athletes have were tested to their physical and mental limits. Watching tennis in the 90s was a boring serve festival. 1st change tennis needs is only one serve - then we will see a truly all round game
Totally agree. However I think the general non playing public cannot appreciate the technicalities of different surfaces and shot making. They do understand gruelling rallies, and so here we are.
The slower courts also reduce the effectiveness of the volley because a less than perfect penetrating volley sits up too much after contact with the court. A guy like Sinner can run 30 feet to get to a volley that on a faster court would have been a winner. Net play has become much less effective, and so volley skills are less valuable, overheads and lobs are rare, and the overall sport is diminished. I’d rather watch doubles.
@@happyaslarry5839 Agreed, but now it's boring for the same reasons. You want VARIETY that's the argument that's being made. Sampras didn't do well on clay, Djoker and Nadal very well may be the opposite, where they wouldn't do well on lightning surfaces under different conditions.
Its like what happened with basketball. It used to be funner because youd have players that specialize in certain areas, but now everyones pretty much the same. I still beleive that Sampras and Federer had more talent in volleying, flick and tricky shots than most anyone today, but they have less athleticism. Federer had such good form hed just take a few steps without as much s urrying or effort, but he couldnt beat Djokovics acrobatics, sliding defense, and couldnt close out games like when he was a robot from outer space in 2004-2008. The sport has turned more into a boxing match and game of endurance now, for better or worse,
I get what you said in that comment but saying that Federer has less athleticism is a huge misconception, how can he have less athleticism while he moves like a ballet dancer and was one of the quickest players on tour plus he has the best footwork by far, just to mention a few.
@@soheiladam7510 Roger was a great athlete with the fastest game and the best form/tecnique. But Novak/Nadal's athleticism in on a whole different level. They run more and much faster, which is the key point in today's tennis which is played with high performing racquets, two-handed backhands and heavier conditions (balls, surfaces on so on ..)
@@stefandrago8578 Yes exactly, but I agree with Andy Roddick in this interview, that they should have at least like a lightning fast synthetic surface in where different styles of play could come back, like serve and volley. Nadal and Djoker take fitness and Djoker particularly health and diet to another level. Djoker is the ultimate modern tennis specialist so he's got the best stats for 10 years from 2010-2020, but he's going to keep going due to having a nearly perfect diet and a focus on his health drinking green smoothies throughout his day. With that said, he wouldn't necessarily be winning lightning fast surface tournaments, kind of how Sampras was unstoppable but not on clay, so Sampras is like the reverse of Djokavic. That variation would make it really fun, but all surfaces seem same-ish today. If we had a couple lightning fast 1000s or a lightning fast grand slam, players like Isner, Karlovic, etc... would probably would have gotten more of a chance to show off their styles of play.
All the repetitive rallies are off-putting. You're seeing the same shot several times, especially during a backhand-to-backhand war of attrition. That's not to mention the grunting. The big serving could have been fixed by getting rid of the second serve, which was discussed. Instead they changed the balls and courts, which had a far more detrimental effect on way the game was played during rallies than allowing only one serve would have done.
Today all the top players are what we used to call baseliners. Sure they hit a lot harder so it's more interesting than watching two top-spin moon ballers at Roland Garros but they are none-theless baseliners. The kids today call them "all-court" players because they play drop shots to change it up but the game is not much different than the women's game except faster. That's also why we are seeing fewer and fewer single handed backhands at the top, much like the women's game. I agree the kids these days hit harder and they are faster but is the game more interesting to watch when everyone plays very similarly and on every surface? I'm not sure about that.
They actually don't hit harder, since they hit more top spin, their consistency improves, but they don't hit as flat of shots, except for maybe a few that had a sort of Del Potro style going on. The flatter you hit, the less accuracy but the faster and more powerful the shot, and Sampras always hit his forehand flat, many speculate it was over 100mph consistently.
Yes because he's the only multi-generational truly 'all-around' player that played 01 Sampras in that Wimbledon match where nearly every shot was serve and volley, but also learned how to play modern tennis as well.
tennis is boring to watch nowadays. Change the surfaces and maybe make pro players all play with gut strings. Maybe that'll help bring back variety and creativity. I'm watching 80s and 90s matches on youtube because it's more fun to watch because of the different styles back then.
We all know that the sport is clearly going backwards. There is no other way to explain Novak's recent dominance. It isn't normal to have a 36 year old player, dominate the game the way that he did in his mid 20s (perhaps to even more of an extent than in his 20s.) You played Novak when he was in his mid 20s. Is it honestly fair to say that Novak has played better over the last three years than he did back in 2011 or 2012?
Is become everyone is good..and no weak backhands. But both of u would have catched on also... W the technology. And who knows imo James Blake would have been better than rodick. Btw I'm an ex husker and love Andy Riddick for putting Nebraska on the map. And for his great career. I just found ur podcast I hope u all don't mind me the long comment. Both of you were my heroes. Now I realize I should have been playing you. But in Mexico I got one point and quit.
The atp finals of 2023 had fast conditions we need more tournaments like that. The atp has become a snoozefest as theres no variety i’d rather watch the WTA.
James is the organiser of the Miami tournament. Players are upset with the facilities, calling it a joke. Asphalt-like surfaces on the outside courts, a plastic chair for players, no towels, the list goes on. Why does James treat the players so badly? Such a tight arse way to run a tournament. It's a disgrace.
Don't make sense. If the rackets are so much better for groundstrokes then they should be equally as good for serving. I think the key variable is the speed of the courts being reduced to accommodate the European players.
@@ObiWon10896-8? 😂 Alcaraz, Nole, Sinner, Meddy aaaand? Dont give me Rublev, Tsitsipas etc. Rublev hasnt been close and Tsitsipas hasnt been close to a final since that Aussie open 7 slams ago. Who Else? Tiafoe? Not even a slam final. Dimi? I wish…
Exactly It’s not better infact it’s regressed. No players have any exploitable weakness because every court has been slowed down into oblivion. What’s the point of having variety when you can just be an athleticism bot and chase down every ball? The worst thing that ever happened was extreme court homogenisation. The way you beat these pushers is to play aggressive and open the court up, good serve, drop shot etc to make them uncomfortable. Medvedev won’t ever win another title his level has a ceiling which is exposed by Alcaraz & sinner that can be aggressive. Other players just don’t have the racquet talent to open up the court.
@@Alexx22570 Even in video games, you'd have player styles like 'baseliner' 'serve and volleyer' 'all-around' (< - Federer or Nalbandian type). But no longer, everyone is a baseliner.
How can tennis and tennis players be better now when it’s abundantly clear that slowing-down court speeds totally levelled the playing field in terms of adaptability? Any of today's big servers/movers vs Alcaraz on a 1995 Wimbledon would be a total blow-out... Roddick from Wimbledon 04 would be a big ask for any of today's Top10 on a true grass court...
past players were better. Its the conditions of today that make them look good, but they are not. Roddick would eat any of the clowns of today alive in past courts and raquets.
Medvedev, Sinner and Alcaraz aren't better than the big 3. It is a decline in quality. As for the spots #4 through #7, I think Safin, Roddick and Hewitt would take care of Zverev Rublev and Rune quite handily. If Prime Murray was on the tour today, he'd win 2 majors every year; people forget, that guy had 9 (NINE!) major finals in maybe the toughest era that tennis has ever had. He goes down as a legend nonetheless.
Yes exactly. What are Blake Roddick talking about. Go watch prime Murray move. He was a great athlete who would have had several more slams with out B3 in this 2020s ATP.
@@bigrobsydney lol. That how it works? Anybody who used to be a name just tells the facts when they get a microphone? I didn’t make up the record. It is what it is. Now, Roddick and Blake are both part of big tennis, ie big money, talking heads in the booth, which has one job, get butts in seats, and eyes locked on the match. While some coaches and ex players way out of the promotion business are saying it like it is, every mouth in the booth in any sport constantly says ‘the game today folks is the best it’s ever been, you can tell your kids’. No exceptions. Otherwise they don’t have the job.
@@Nill757 Problem is, you balance your own cynicism against what you don't want to hear, and always think the cynicism must be right no matter what. Let me ask you a simple question then; what experience do you have of your own (that is, first hand experience) that you can call on, to quote as evidence for your own position? How many years were you a pro on the tour? What ranking did you get up to? Did you play players in different eras? Who was the best player you ever played against? Who was the best you ever beat? I could ask you a lot of very direct questions, and I would bet the answer is you have zero experience. And yet, you still seem to think, with your cynical world view, that you have a more relevant opinion, than a grand slam winner and world number one?
@@bigrobsydney Please just stop. Its not about some credentials game you want to play, in a vain attempt to have only celebrity talk. It’s about the match record that you don’t want to hear. It’s shows, for instance, 39 yo Federer, w knee surgeries and chronic back, beating everybody in top Next Gen, Zverev, Berrettini (1,2,2 WtH), Norrie, Tsitsipas, Medvedev (3-0), Rune, Hurkacz, the lot. None of that is my “opinion”. Twenty years ago when Blake, Roddick were on tour, no late 30s player beat top five players. It *never* happened.
Say they aren't going to talk about how it was better in the good old days, and then they find a way to do it without praising themselves, instead its about conditions. WEll done.
“Where do you go w Medvedev?” Cmon. Old Fed beat him twice easily. Med is a poor mover coming forward. Fed brought him in w short balls and beat him short ball points again and again. You can’t have 38yo Fed beating everybody in NextGen and say the “athleticism” is getting better, just because the modern gear is better. Same w everyone modern atp moving to back fence on returns. They can’t handle the returns, and severs can’t move in fast enough to punish deep returns.
I agree. Medvedev moves really well laterally but is lacking in movement towards the net where he can be exploited. Kyrgios has had great success against Medvedev since he can use the net, short angle volleys, and drop shots to hurt him. This is also why Alcaraz is a bad match up for Medvedev. Most players try to rally with Medvedev which is a losing proposition for almost everyone except maybe Novak.
@@maksimturchyn3204 ? Medvedev made final US Open 2019, same year Fed beat him 4 and 2 in Miami, 3rd straight win. That kind of thing *never* used to happen 20 yrs ago, 38 yo guys hanging around the tour and beating GS finalists. Med had all same weapons then, but serve, big ball ground strokes. But he is not a great mover, esp short game, not then, not now.
@@shivasuresh5957 exactly. Disappointing to see Blake deny this. Guys in the booth have always had the same pressure: tell the audience this is the greatest thing they’ve ever seen, don’t change the channel. Booth guys get critical, don’t do that, and pro tennis agents and media money and venues will dump them.
ah, but the Women's game is not so banal. esp. as there are so many adorable girls on tour now. and MANY villainesses! name one? sure: how about two? we LOVE to loathe Ostapenko and Azarenka. hahaha.
Dirt marks line calling ok if you want to hold on to tradition but let the players be able to challenge in the booth like they do in football and futebol. Might have gone into a 5th set tiebreaker. Should have put the replay on the big screen to show what an idiot process it is. Also umpires speaking only in French when they are not even French to all the fans watching that maybe 5% speak French is so passe 😂
and TV needs to show court level behind the player camera pov … the normal TV pov makes the game look pedestrian af. you dont really see how fast and high the balls are bouncing. or how much court player is covering. i get its harder on the eyes over a 3 hour match but show us more than one freakn camera angle during matches.
1) poly strings should be illegal on the atp tour 2) speed up the grass a little. not back to 2001, but this is waaaaay too slow. I don't want to see baseliners winning wimbledon. please.
Total bullshit, tennis these days is slower, less winners and way more boring. Other than a few players most of the top 50 look and play identical. Blake is pissed up…
yes. They are pumping fists from the first point of the match looking everytime to their boxes, asking from crowd support, yelling like they have won 5 Wimbledons in row just because they broke serve at 3-3 in the first. These are clowns, social media, digitalized clowns, just benefited from ultra modern raquets and strings that do it all for them. THEY ARE NOT BETTER.
Yea go watch Agassi Sampras 2001 qtr you will never see hitting like that in addition to the fast hard court bozo. Nadal Novak and Murray would go run and hide you jerk.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Bigger In Texas [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QxTkZTLWdo4/mqdefault.jpg)
Two old timers keeping it real - love the honest, no-BS commentary about the state of today's game from two former top 10 player with no agenda. This is now my favorite tennis-related channel.
I miss the indoor carpet- lightning fast... McEnroe and Martina used to eat people alive.
And then Becker, Sampras..
I love James Blake. He's such an awesome human being. I remember James commentating at the U.S. Open in 2022 when Francis Tiafoe epically made it into the semifinals (losing to Alcaraz) by beating Nadal in the quarterfinals. After Tiafoe's quarterfinal win, James was talking about Tiafoe and it brought tears to his eyes... on national television. Wow, what a moment. I cried too. James was so proud of Francis, highlighting the often insurmountable hurdles that black Americans have to jump over to succeed in life, especially in tennis. James exposed a realness, a rawness, never seen on TV. I felt one with James and Francis and the plight of all Americans who struggle to succeed. James's words were more than tennis. His words were about life. It was beautiful. Thank you, James Blake.
One more thought about Francis Tiafoe. Like many armchair quarterbacks, I sent Francis a message on Facebook after his loss to Alcaraz. To my utter surprise, Francis wrote back to me. Professional coaches, players, and nobodies like me "know" what tennis players need to do to improve. (One vexing player is Denis Shapovalov. I've never seen someone with so much talent have so little success, but that's another story.) When I wrote to Francis, I told him, with respect and grace, what needed to improve. I was convinced that if he changed this one thing about his game he'd win a major. I said that he need to stretch several hours a day. Really. That's it. I said this because when you see Francis walk, his gait his short. His bones are stiff and he's not naturally flexible. This is the way he was born. It's genetic and he can't beat himself up about it. You look at Djokovic and he can do the splits and put his legs behind his head. Apparently, he stretches several hours a day and I'm certain his stretching routine gives him a huge advantage over other players. Of course, other people critique Francis's backhand and other parts of his game which needs improvement. I focused on his stretching. What blew my mind is Francis wrote back to me, concurred with my thoughts, and thanked me for sharing them. I bow to you, Francis Tiafoe.
To make a long story short, James Blake and Francis Tiafoe, you're awesome !!!
Tiafoe is doing great in the modern era too
@@markaven5249 Agreed. Success is relative. The fact is, most tennis players will never win a major. If you're a tennis player and you love what you do, and make a living doing it, you're already way ahead of most people in the world. Tiafoe most likely won't win a major but this doesn't prevent him from trying, traveling the world, and smiling all the way to the bank doing it. Congrats to Tiafoe.
Yeah.. crazy what happened to him with that police officer.
Tennis doesn't grab my attention the way it used to. Watching this video and reading ALL of the comments to-date tells me what happened.
When did it grab ur attention?
Id say Alcaraz vs Sinner has become a modern classic.. and we just had an epic between Novak and Alcaraz at the Olympics.
Best tennis podcast out there. Could someone show Andy how to turn off his incoming email chime though?😂
Tennis has improved much like film ... It's a Marvel movie now - Formulaic and all about margins. As a spectator who lived through the 90s, I agree would be nice to show case some of the faster game styles again.. Bring back carpet courts, &/or slick indoors... if even for a few weeks of the year.
more grass court tennis. it is hard to maintain but make the effort and get more tournaments on the calendar.
Great comment about change in court speeds. I totally agree, and wish they would add some fast courts (or fast balls) to the tour. Everything plays like clay now….
Also, the homogeneous court speeds made it very easy to the Big 3 to rack up slams. No way Nadal wins Wimbledon on the old fast grass, or Fed wins French Open if it was slower.
@@johnlicciardello2389That’s a good point! Nobody really talks about that anymore.. you didn’t use to expect one guy to win every type of tournament at all..
@@johnlicciardello2389 Fed was the second best clay court player in the world for at least 6 years
Hate what they did to the Wimbledon grass. It’s like another French Open
the ATP finals in turin were incredibly fast during the last two years. becker said they were as fast as frankfurt and Stuttgart. the USO laykold surface is definitely medium fast category and bordering on fast in some outside courts, so not all surfaces ate molasses slow as they were pre 2020
Not enough players in this latest era have a decent volley. Most of them treat the net like it is the ledge at Niagara Falls. So yes, today's players are really good from the back of the court and athletic but most lack an all around game. Alcaraz is one of the few that can play well from the front and the back. Kyrgios is gifted from every part of the court. That's a guy that could have won 6-7 slams if really wanted it badly. Sinner is building a multi-faceted game as well. I have to disagree on Medvedev. He's incredible from the baseline but he didn't build his net capability enough which has held him back from winning more slams...I love watching him play nonetheless.
Kyrgios is a joke. For all that's 'gifted' about him, there's more that's 'Tragic Johnson' about him cuz he's his own worst enemy. And there have been baseliners for decades who didn't like coming to the net just like there are droves of players now who are very good to great at the net. A lot of the top 30 players play singles and doubles.
Exactly Medwedew has a pretty one dimensional game but it's a very uncomfortable and effective one.
Serve and volley is completely obsolete as a viable main tactic
@@sharifs649 I'm not talking about serve and volley as a main tactic. I'm talking most players aren't even willing to come to net on a short ball or strong FH during a rally. Most guys don't even try to gain an edge by controlling the net in opportune moments. Novak wins by baseline only because he is that good but most other players need to play a more well rounded game. The Novak era bred way too many baseline ball bashers who have no clue how to play from the front of the court.
I completely agree with you as an older tennis fan having watched tennis for 30+ years, but I'm realizing all these younger people don't understand this at all. Nadal and Djoker very well may have been ranked lower than 30+ in 1995.
I loved watching Blake. So cool! Roddick too!
If Federer hadn't been there in 2004-2008, Blake and Roddick would have grand slams.
Wait no...Nadal, but still.
@@markaven5249Dont know about that. Blake only met Roger 3 times in slams and Blake managed to win 1 set.
2003 USO that Roddick ended up winning.
2006 where Roger defeated Roddick in the final.
2008 Aussie open that Novak won.
06 woulda been his best shot.
He defeated Roddick twice that year on grass and HC but even if not then Roddick gets another slam most likely.
08 Aussie open? Novak was too strong.
03 Roddick was red hot having just won Rogers cup beating Roger and Nalby on the Way.
Anyway, he would just be taking away Roddick victory if he did.
Roddick woulda definitely won a handful or more without Fed though.
Nadal didnt defeat Roddick and Blake in slams in that period,
It's a shame that the surfaces have changed so much. There should be more surfaces... that's something tennis could add to make each tournament unique but I get the feeling they want dominant players across all surfaces because it's easier to create a following of personality than it is of the sport as a whole.
100%
its not just the surfaces. the USO and AO are quite fast of late (since 2020) but the tennis balls used at the AO are slower on average, and at night play extremely slow. Wimbledon uses the slowest balls on tour. But i think organizers realized conditions had slowed down too much so there was an effort to speed up play especially at the USO and ATP finals (since 2019). Becker said the surface at turin is as fast as 90s indoor carpet plus its played at altitude. so its a mixed bag. i think a few tweaks like faster type 2 balls at Wimbledon and faster balls at the Australian open will change tennis for the better. in all honesty the french open plays much faster then pre 2000 because the tennis balls are lighter (lightest among all the slams), plus the USO has the best balance of medium fast courts and type 2 tennis balls. unfortunately some indoor courts are ridiculously slow like astana, and frankly they are boring as hell to watch. some reform is definitely required
Exactly, sponsorships and celebrity is easier to create when you encourage and prop a few at the top up, ATP even pays them millions to just show up, then gives them byes in the tournaments and easier draws. This accounts for Fed, Nadal and Djoker throughout the years, gotta at least try to prop up a few and keep it consistent. Remember, at the end of the day, it's all entertainment and your players are sort of like your characters in a storybook.
@@z1az285 Also, faster balls, strings and courts would mean less injuries, something they don't talk about much. You have more knee injuries as of the last 10 years, now even the invincible Djoker is getting knee surgeries. In my opinion, racquet sports should be more about skill and a little less...at least a LITTLE less about stamina and fitness and body building.
@@markaven5249 Agreed 💯. These aren't big changes but i fail to understand why they aren't being implemented
@ServedPodcast I remember James Blake doing his early commentary right when Justin Gimelstob was still on air. Gimelstob was too hyper. Blake was calm, yet, insightful, so I liked him from the start. There were others that I liked from way back when like Patrick McEnroe back in the 80s (he's less insightful these days, I feel) and one guy who did a fantastic job (along with James) was Jimmy Arias. I wish he did more commentary. And of course, Andy has shown fantastic insights as well. Just such a relaxed interview when James is being interviewed. So chill.
We need fast courts
than it will be unplayable players are much stronger and can hit harder
@@Bambotb Is there no middle ground? Couldn't the court speed of Wimbledon be increased a little, so it's something in between what we have now and what it was like in the 90's.
For me the serve is still to effective- to many aces and points less than 4 shots
the ATP finals in turin were incredibly fast during the last two years. Becker said the surface and conditions were as fast as Frankfurt and Stuttgart.
@@123a-o5d yes there is a middle ground. speed up the grass courts and take away the poly strings. you're welcome. (and also...yes...the grass was changed to a 50/50 blend around 2003 to slow down the big servers. could go maybe 30-70 etc etc. on that)
Andy roddick and James Blake I think together make two of the more well-rounded tennis analysts.... Just a good perspective and honesty which is lacking especially in somebody like a John McEnroe. 🤣🤣
Love watching both these guys play. But the courts have gotten slower and we don’t get to see the different games. I want to see the courts go back to the fast courts. Bring back the old courts
Absolutely agree
I think it’s a waste of time to compare past and present players. I will say, however, that the court surfaces are way too slow and they’ve made the balls too heavy. I’d like to see players show off their lightning quick reaction times and be able to hit winners more freely. These matches with marathon length points have become somewhat of a bore for me.
oooh james!! we love(d) you!!!
I like the baseball idea that they still use wood bats. it is better isn't it ? obviously can't go back to woodies, but controlling string technology including weave patterns could be done and maybe maybe cut the advantage top `10 guys have
Tennis is one of the few sports that is greatly impacted by advances in equipment technology, specifically the racquet. The racquets allow for more powerful shots. Strings like Nadal uses can create insane spin. So because of this, the players have had to get faster and stronger off both sides. And as Blake stated, the game can be "manipulated" with changes in the surface. It's all very homogenous now which worked in the favor of certain players like Nadal and Novak. The superfast grass or concrete no longer exists. While it's made the game "better", its' actually made the game less interesting to me and less desirable to watch.I can't think of any other sport that can be "manipulated" the way tennis has been, and not necessarily for nefarious reasons.
True what would happen if MLB allowed aluminum bats. Baseball would be a different game.
@@willkittwk Ever watched a really high level wiffle ball match? It's a whole other game from baseball, same rules and everything, wildly different people will be at the top.
With the earlier equipment they needed to be much cleaner ball strikers though.
Finally some actual real tennis knowledge being dropped. I thought I was the only one thinking all these things. It feels amazing knowing that I wasn't the only one. we really lack this stuff in the tennis world. 99% of people have no real clue of what they're talking about, and as an avid tennis player and fan you can tell. Even grand slam commentators have no real clue about Tennis and why Players play a certain way or go for a certain shot. Most of the time it's just the same typical commentators with the same kind of knowledge as the Netflix break point producers (ie. no real deep knowledge of the sport). Which is really sad.
Yep, having grown up in the 90s and early 2000s I remember the feel of a racquet from that time, and small tournaments I'd spectate in the club my dad went to, he and others had insane serves and there was a ton of serve and volleying going around, but not just that varied styles. The club had 6 clay courts and 2 hard courts, fun times, I'd hit agains the backboard like 5 hours a day at the time, you'd rent/borrow racquets out, and I'd often try out the wooden ones, the long metal ones (I assume they were from the 80s), and the 90s racquets were popular, and it all made a huge difference.
It’s very real for these guys to admit tennis is improving
True. The surfaces are too similar. Too many grinders
I knew Wimbledon had got slower but I did not know the French had got faster. Here is a true story from the Hamburg Masters in, I think, 2008. It is played on clay of course, and after a match on centre court a few people shovelled all the clay into wheelbarrows and removed it. What was left was a sort of hardcourt which I assume plays faster than the clay. And who was on centre court in the next match? Roger Federer. That is blatant favouritism and it shouldn't be allowed, then or now.
I think the Paris Masters was the same. Used to be very fast and Roger would never play there. Then one year they slowed it down a ton and Roger came to play.
It was carpet and Federer hated carpet, despite it being fast. When the carpet was replaced with hardcourt, Fed came to play.@@johnlicciardello2389
@@johnlicciardello2389why Federer would rather play on a slow court than a fast one🤦, that makes no sense. next time don't troll and assume they changed the court just for Federer or any other player.
Fed Nadal and Djoker are definitely favored, the top few will be, because you want consistency. Roddick for example, they wanted to favor him and give him easier draws etc etc..., but Fed was around and he couldn't beat him, but still they wanted Roddick to win many slams, even the announcer after his first was like "The first one", then he never won another, yet Roddick got commercial deals, endorsements etc....
I admit I also wanted American tennis to have a new number 1, but Federer stole it away from us.
@@soheiladam7510 He's actually got a point, Federer petitioned for slower courts, too bad karma came back at him when Djoker and Nadal came along, I bet Federer wished he hadn't done that.
That Friday Miami Open was a disaster for fans and players. I was there. Blake is tournament director, need some answers.
Yes, he should get with God so he’s prepared for rain lol.
Nobody likes Blake. His support of black lives matter and the destruction of his country is a disgrace. A limousine liberal.
I have been playing since 1982, I teach the sport, and love playing it. BUT, I can't watch modern tennis. Too boring and no variety. I used to liked seeing the different styles of play. French was slow (never watched), Wimbledon was fast (love the serve-and-volley), and the US Open was an inbetween. I understand some people want to see rallies, but they slowed the ball and courts down so much for those long rallies, that matches are taking 6 hours (2012 Aussie Open with Nadal and Novak. That's inhumane to a player. And, I don't have time to watch something that long.
Those marathon matches are classics- where the athletes have were tested to their physical and mental limits. Watching tennis in the 90s was a boring serve festival.
1st change tennis needs is only one serve - then we will see a truly all round game
Totally agree. However I think the general non playing public cannot appreciate the technicalities of different surfaces and shot making. They do understand gruelling rallies, and so here we are.
The slower courts also reduce the effectiveness of the volley because a less than perfect penetrating volley sits up too much after contact with the court. A guy like Sinner can run 30 feet to get to a volley that on a faster court would have been a winner. Net play has become much less effective, and so volley skills are less valuable, overheads and lobs are rare, and the overall sport is diminished. I’d rather watch doubles.
@@happyaslarry5839 Agreed, but now it's boring for the same reasons. You want VARIETY that's the argument that's being made. Sampras didn't do well on clay, Djoker and Nadal very well may be the opposite, where they wouldn't do well on lightning surfaces under different conditions.
Yes, but I’ve lost interest. Two guys with two handed backhands bashing the ball.
Its like what happened with basketball. It used to be funner because youd have players that specialize in certain areas, but now everyones pretty much the same. I still beleive that Sampras and Federer had more talent in volleying, flick and tricky shots than most anyone today, but they have less athleticism. Federer had such good form hed just take a few steps without as much s urrying or effort, but he couldnt beat Djokovics acrobatics, sliding defense, and couldnt close out games like when he was a robot from outer space in 2004-2008. The sport has turned more into a boxing match and game of endurance now, for better or worse,
I get what you said in that comment but saying that Federer has less athleticism is a huge misconception, how can he have less athleticism while he moves like a ballet dancer and was one of the quickest players on tour plus he has the best footwork by far, just to mention a few.
@@soheiladam7510 Roger was a great athlete with the fastest game and the best form/tecnique. But Novak/Nadal's athleticism in on a whole different level. They run more and much faster, which is the key point in today's tennis which is played with high performing racquets, two-handed backhands and heavier conditions (balls, surfaces on so on ..)
@@stefandrago8578 Yes exactly, but I agree with Andy Roddick in this interview, that they should have at least like a lightning fast synthetic surface in where different styles of play could come back, like serve and volley. Nadal and Djoker take fitness and Djoker particularly health and diet to another level. Djoker is the ultimate modern tennis specialist so he's got the best stats for 10 years from 2010-2020, but he's going to keep going due to having a nearly perfect diet and a focus on his health drinking green smoothies throughout his day. With that said, he wouldn't necessarily be winning lightning fast surface tournaments, kind of how Sampras was unstoppable but not on clay, so Sampras is like the reverse of Djokavic. That variation would make it really fun, but all surfaces seem same-ish today.
If we had a couple lightning fast 1000s or a lightning fast grand slam, players like Isner, Karlovic, etc... would probably would have gotten more of a chance to show off their styles of play.
All the repetitive rallies are off-putting. You're seeing the same shot several times, especially during a backhand-to-backhand war of attrition. That's not to mention the grunting. The big serving could have been fixed by getting rid of the second serve, which was discussed. Instead they changed the balls and courts, which had a far more detrimental effect on way the game was played during rallies than allowing only one serve would have done.
Today all the top players are what we used to call baseliners. Sure they hit a lot harder so it's more interesting than watching two top-spin moon ballers at Roland Garros but they are none-theless baseliners. The kids today call them "all-court" players because they play drop shots to change it up but the game is not much different than the women's game except faster. That's also why we are seeing fewer and fewer single handed backhands at the top, much like the women's game. I agree the kids these days hit harder and they are faster but is the game more interesting to watch when everyone plays very similarly and on every surface? I'm not sure about that.
They actually don't hit harder, since they hit more top spin, their consistency improves, but they don't hit as flat of shots, except for maybe a few that had a sort of Del Potro style going on. The flatter you hit, the less accuracy but the faster and more powerful the shot, and Sampras always hit his forehand flat, many speculate it was over 100mph consistently.
Go after Sinner's backhand, Andy. Keep the ball flat and through the middle of the court to his backhand.
And that’s why Roger was soooo good
Yes because he's the only multi-generational truly 'all-around' player that played 01 Sampras in that Wimbledon match where nearly every shot was serve and volley, but also learned how to play modern tennis as well.
Y'all are both two of the sexiest guys ever on tour. Woof.
Also smart and funny
with today's athletic abilities. fast courts won't be like they used to be.
tennis is boring to watch nowadays. Change the surfaces and maybe make pro players all play with gut strings. Maybe that'll help bring back variety and creativity. I'm watching 80s and 90s matches on youtube because it's more fun to watch because of the different styles back then.
We all know that the sport is clearly going backwards. There is no other way to explain Novak's recent dominance. It isn't normal to have a 36 year old player, dominate the game the way that he did in his mid 20s (perhaps to even more of an extent than in his 20s.) You played Novak when he was in his mid 20s. Is it honestly fair to say that Novak has played better over the last three years than he did back in 2011 or 2012?
Is become everyone is good..and no weak backhands. But both of u would have catched on also... W the technology. And who knows imo James Blake would have been better than rodick.
Btw I'm an ex husker and love Andy Riddick for putting Nebraska on the map. And for his great career. I just found ur podcast I hope u all don't mind me the long comment.
Both of you were my heroes. Now I realize I should have been playing you. But in Mexico I got one point and quit.
The atp finals of 2023 had fast conditions we need more tournaments like that. The atp has become a snoozefest as theres no variety i’d rather watch the WTA.
James is the organiser of the Miami tournament. Players are upset with the facilities, calling it a joke. Asphalt-like surfaces on the outside courts, a plastic chair for players, no towels, the list goes on. Why does James treat the players so badly? Such a tight arse way to run a tournament. It's a disgrace.
I have to disagree here. The good players today have glaring weaknesses.
Don't make sense. If the rackets are so much better for groundstrokes then they should be equally as good for serving. I think the key variable is the speed of the courts being reduced to accommodate the European players.
Tennis is becoming boring. Everyone plays the same.
If you think tennis is boring just look at the current state of pro golf 😂
@@ObiWon10896-8? 😂
Alcaraz, Nole, Sinner, Meddy aaaand?
Dont give me Rublev, Tsitsipas etc.
Rublev hasnt been close and Tsitsipas hasnt been close to a final since that Aussie open 7 slams ago.
Who Else? Tiafoe? Not even a slam final.
Dimi? I wish…
Started with tennis is getting better blah blah blah…. Ended with it was better then wasn’t it?
Exactly
It’s not better infact it’s regressed.
No players have any exploitable weakness because every court has been slowed down into oblivion.
What’s the point of having variety when you can just be an athleticism bot and chase down every ball?
The worst thing that ever happened was extreme court homogenisation. The way you beat these pushers is to play aggressive and open the court up, good serve, drop shot etc to make them uncomfortable.
Medvedev won’t ever win another title his level has a ceiling which is exposed by Alcaraz & sinner that can be aggressive. Other players just don’t have the racquet talent to open up the court.
@@Alexx22570 Even in video games, you'd have player styles like 'baseliner' 'serve and volleyer' 'all-around' (< - Federer or Nalbandian type).
But no longer, everyone is a baseliner.
Things dont keep getting better and better.... look at the NBA for example 😂
and football. (soccer in the u.s)
How can tennis and tennis players be better now when it’s abundantly clear that slowing-down court speeds totally levelled the playing field in terms of adaptability?
Any of today's big servers/movers vs Alcaraz on a 1995 Wimbledon would be a total blow-out...
Roddick from Wimbledon 04 would be a big ask for any of today's Top10 on a true grass court...
past players were better. Its the conditions of today that make them look good, but they are not. Roddick would eat any of the clowns of today alive in past courts and raquets.
sampras catching strays from his children 😂
"Advancement in technology" 😃 How about technique??
Medvedev, Sinner and Alcaraz aren't better than the big 3. It is a decline in quality. As for the spots #4 through #7, I think Safin, Roddick and Hewitt would take care of Zverev Rublev and Rune quite handily. If Prime Murray was on the tour today, he'd win 2 majors every year; people forget, that guy had 9 (NINE!) major finals in maybe the toughest era that tennis has ever had. He goes down as a legend nonetheless.
Yes exactly. What are Blake Roddick talking about. Go watch prime Murray move. He was a great athlete who would have had several more slams with out B3 in this 2020s ATP.
@@Nill757 Roddick knows what he's talking about. He's a slam winner, and world #1. I think he knows more than you guys, sorry.
@@bigrobsydney lol. That how it works? Anybody who used to be a name just tells the facts when they get a microphone?
I didn’t make up the record. It is what it is. Now, Roddick and Blake are both part of big tennis, ie big money, talking heads in the booth, which has one job, get butts in seats, and eyes locked on the match. While some coaches and ex players way out of the promotion business are saying it like it is, every mouth in the booth in any sport constantly says ‘the game today folks is the best it’s ever been, you can tell your kids’. No exceptions. Otherwise they don’t have the job.
@@Nill757 Problem is, you balance your own cynicism against what you don't want to hear, and always think the cynicism must be right no matter what.
Let me ask you a simple question then; what experience do you have of your own (that is, first hand experience) that you can call on, to quote as evidence for your own position? How many years were you a pro on the tour? What ranking did you get up to? Did you play players in different eras? Who was the best player you ever played against? Who was the best you ever beat?
I could ask you a lot of very direct questions, and I would bet the answer is you have zero experience. And yet, you still seem to think, with your cynical world view, that you have a more relevant opinion, than a grand slam winner and world number one?
@@bigrobsydney Please just stop. Its not about some credentials game you want to play, in a vain attempt to have only celebrity talk.
It’s about the match record that you don’t want to hear. It’s shows, for instance, 39 yo Federer, w knee surgeries and chronic back, beating everybody in top Next Gen, Zverev, Berrettini (1,2,2 WtH), Norrie, Tsitsipas, Medvedev (3-0), Rune, Hurkacz, the lot. None of that is my “opinion”. Twenty years ago when Blake, Roddick were on tour, no late 30s player beat top five players. It *never* happened.
The first change I want to see is - only one serve - then we will a truly all round game
Say they aren't going to talk about how it was better in the good old days, and then they find a way to do it without praising themselves, instead its about conditions. WEll done.
“Where do you go w Medvedev?”
Cmon. Old Fed beat him twice easily. Med is a poor mover coming forward. Fed brought him in w short balls and beat him short ball points again and again.
You can’t have 38yo Fed beating everybody in NextGen and say the “athleticism” is getting better, just because the modern gear is better. Same w everyone modern atp moving to back fence on returns. They can’t handle the returns, and severs can’t move in fast enough to punish deep returns.
I agree. Medvedev moves really well laterally but is lacking in movement towards the net where he can be exploited. Kyrgios has had great success against Medvedev since he can use the net, short angle volleys, and drop shots to hurt him. This is also why Alcaraz is a bad match up for Medvedev. Most players try to rally with Medvedev which is a losing proposition for almost everyone except maybe Novak.
Medved was not top player back then, he progressed into the top after roger's retirement
@@maksimturchyn3204 ? Medvedev made final US Open 2019, same year Fed beat him 4 and 2 in Miami, 3rd straight win. That kind of thing *never* used to happen 20 yrs ago, 38 yo guys hanging around the tour and beating GS finalists. Med had all same weapons then, but serve, big ball ground strokes. But he is not a great mover, esp short game, not then, not now.
@@shivasuresh5957 exactly. Disappointing to see Blake deny this.
Guys in the booth have always had the same pressure: tell the audience this is the greatest thing they’ve ever seen, don’t change the channel. Booth guys get critical, don’t do that, and pro tennis agents and media money and venues will dump them.
If you want to talk about thr next gen feds lost to tsitsipas 2x in 2019 as well as Rublev when he was a nobody.
ah, but the Women's game is not so banal. esp. as there are so many adorable girls on tour now. and MANY villainesses! name one? sure: how about two? we LOVE to loathe Ostapenko and Azarenka. hahaha.
Dirt marks line calling ok if you want to hold on to tradition but let the players be able to challenge in the booth like they do in football and futebol. Might have gone into a 5th set tiebreaker. Should have put the replay on the big screen to show what an idiot process it is.
Also umpires speaking only in French when they are not even French to all the fans watching that maybe 5% speak French is so passe 😂
and TV needs to show court level behind the player camera pov … the normal TV pov makes the game look pedestrian af.
you dont really see how fast and high the balls are bouncing. or how much court player is covering.
i get its harder on the eyes over a 3 hour match but show us more than one freakn camera angle during matches.
Andy’s interviews would be better if he talked less.
1) poly strings should be illegal on the atp tour 2) speed up the grass a little. not back to 2001, but this is waaaaay too slow. I don't want to see baseliners winning wimbledon. please.
I don't watch tennis anymore because of that. All the same players playing on the same grounds. And in a boring way
Total bullshit, tennis these days is slower, less winners and way more boring. Other than a few players most of the top 50 look and play identical. Blake is pissed up…
weaknesses are on mental side. this has not changed at all. maybe even dropped
yes. They are pumping fists from the first point of the match looking everytime to their boxes, asking from crowd support, yelling like they have won 5 Wimbledons in row just because they broke serve at 3-3 in the first.
These are clowns, social media, digitalized clowns, just benefited from ultra modern raquets and strings that do it all for them. THEY ARE NOT BETTER.
old dogs saying their generation was harder are a joke
Yea go watch Agassi Sampras 2001 qtr you will never see hitting like that in addition to the fast hard court bozo. Nadal Novak and Murray would go run and hide you jerk.
Provide water and towels James . Crappy tournament director .
what makes him "crappy?"