*Official* Tennis Thread

[Slats4ever]

nah i don't think so!

 

[Magrat Garlick]

nah i don't think so!

Why are there so many more clay specialists (Costa, Ferrer, Verkerk, Kuerten) than hardcourt specialists, then?

 

[Slats4ever]

they're not really clay court specialists... more just retards on hard court

 

[Agent TBY]

nah i don't think so!

Well its accepted that the French Open is specialist territory,all the rest are quite open IMO.

Why does Rolan Garros make any difference to a powerhouse underdog blowing away a top seed? It's the same chances as anywhere.

Because clay is a tough surface to play on,just standing there and blasting away will not do you any good against a player of real class.

 

[Slats4ever]

u can say it's also an easier surface to play on because of the fact that people with slower serves can get away with it. there's no saying one's harder or easier than the other. just different

 

[marc71178]

And players who were good on hard courts didnt play when Sampras won the US Open? Not a great logic there Marc.

No, but the difference is, Sampras was a hard court player, Agassi is not a clay courter.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

they're not really clay court specialists... more just retards on hard court

Good on clay (enough to reach finals) + bad on hard court? Sounds pretty much like the definition of a clay specialist...

 

[Simon]

No, but the difference is, Sampras was a hard court player, Agassi is not a clay courter.

Agassi has won the french open, but he wont win it this year, ill assure u that...

 

[Agent TBY]

Good on clay (enough to reach finals) + bad on hard court? Sounds pretty much like the definition of a clay specialist...

I'd say being good on clay is enough to be a clay specialist.

Why does somebody have to be bad on hard courts to be a clay court specialist?

 

[Slats4ever]

Good on clay (enough to reach finals) + bad on hard court? Sounds pretty much like the definition of a clay specialist...

or a poor hard court player

 

[Slats4ever]

I'd say being good on clay is enough to be a clay specialist.

Why does somebody have to be bad on hard courts to be a clay court specialist?

because if they were good on both then they're be a good player.
not just a 1 surface person

 

[Simon]

i think some people dont quite understand this. Generally all players have similar abilities when it comes to hard court, however the big difference is between Grass and Clay. Clay courters areoften picked on as one court specialists mainly because they dont do well on grass. Also given the fact Hard court or Rebound Ace is more like Grass, someone like Kuerten has done well on hard courts, winning titles making finals etc.... even Ferrero made the US open final a couple of years ago, its just on grass these guys struggle more...

 

[Agent TBY]

because if they were good on both then they're be a good player.
not just a 1 surface person

But why can't a good player be a clay court specialist?

EDIT : I mean,if he was incredibly good on clay,why can't he be known as a clay court specialist?

 

[Pratters]

i think some people dont quite understand this. Generally all players have similar abilities when it comes to hard court, however the big difference is between Grass and Clay. Clay courters areoften picked on as one court specialists mainly because they dont do well on grass. Also given the fact Hard court or Rebound Ace is more like Grass, someone like Kuerten has done well on hard courts, winning titles making finals etc.... even Ferrero made the US open final a couple of years ago, its just on grass these guys struggle more...

Yeah totally true. But Agassi is good at clay as well. I dont think it can be said it would be more difficult for Agassi to win the French just because of clay court specialists.

 

[Craig]

Roger Federer.

 

[Slats4ever]

i think some people dont quite understand this. Generally all players have similar abilities when it comes to hard court, however the big difference is between Grass and Clay. Clay courters areoften picked on as one court specialists mainly because they dont do well on grass. Also given the fact Hard court or Rebound Ace is more like Grass, someone like Kuerten has done well on hard courts, winning titles making finals etc.... even Ferrero made the US open final a couple of years ago, its just on grass these guys struggle more...

agreed

wish i could said it that well

 

[marc71178]

Yeah totally true. But Agassi is good at clay as well. I dont think it can be said it would be more difficult for Agassi to win the French just because of clay court specialists.

So how come he's not got past the quarters in the last 6 or 7 years then?

 

[Jono]

they're not really clay court specialists... more just retards on hard court

LOL!

 

[Pratters]

So how come he's not got past the quarters in the last 6 or 7 years then?

Wow now you are questioning Agassi's clay court talent? Did I ever say he is going to win the tournament or is likely to? No.

But as I said, in sport things are possible and Agassi is no muck in clay. If you think he has been a muck in clay in the past 6-7 years, you havent been watching too much tennis I am afraid.

 

[Sanz]

So how come he's not got past the quarters in the last 6 or 7 years then?

FYI. Andre won French Open in 1999 which is definately less than 6-7 years.

Since then he has reached Quarters 3 times (out of 5) meaning he has been in top 8, which is not bad considering he is getting older.