What About The 2013 US Open?
What About The 2013 US Open?
First of all, I wish McEnroe and Carillo would not give us dumb information during the point. They all act like we are stupid and don’t know anything about the game. Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert are probably the worst. 99% of people watching understand the basics of the game. You don’t have to explain everything we can see! Boris Becker is great at commentary. Hire him ESPN and CBS.
Last year I was watching the US Open on those extra channels of ESPN. I was switching channels and all of a sudden I thought I had arrived in HEAVEN. I was watching a match and for some reason ESPN did not put any announcers on the match. Oh, it was heaven. I could just enjoy the match, without having to turn down the sound. What a great idea ESPN. Of course when I switch channels I realized I was in HELL again and either had to turn the sound down or listen to these people wanting to hear their own voice damn.
Most surprising match with the women I think was Camila Georgi beating Caroline Wozniacki. Georgi playing like a top tenner and Wozniacki hittng balls where Georgi liked them. Never hit balls out of Georgi’s hitting zone. Not a very smart match by Wozniacki. In the men’s probably the Andy Murray vs. Stanislav Wawrinka match. Murray looking like he just swam the English channel. What the hell happened.
Most annoying to me besides what I mentioned earlier, was that they are always talking about the player being tight when they miss a shot. When the same player makes a great shot next they never correct themselves. May be the commentators choked a lot when they were playing. Maybe Samantha Stosur choked, but she almost choked the whole match.
Now about the tennis. Men’s matches were better as a whole than women’s matches. The women don’t know how to control the power and as a result make way to many errors. Watch some one like Li Na, I am not just knocking her, but she can play great tennis and the next day won’t be able to find the court. A lot of women play like that now, and I think they don’t know how to control the power. Unforced errors galore.
Serena Williams seems to be able to do it well, maybe because she has played with power all her life, but also got better. When Maria Sharapova beat her at Wimbledon, her forehand was not what it is now. I think people can relate to women’s tennis a little better, because they are not perfect and make bad errors. Men’s tennis has to watch out. The men are becoming too good, too perfect, and the tennis almost becomes boring. The points sometimes look like they are just rallying with each other. They are so fast and consistent.
Of course there were unreal matches, especially the semis and finals. It was good to see young Americans do pretty well. Now we just have to see how they do after the Open usually they fall by the wayside. We have to see great 16 year old American girls playing in the main draw and great 17 year old boys to become exited about the future of great American players. As long as Patrick is in charge, I don’t think it will happen.
I like Rafael Nadal better than Roger Federer and for this reason, Federer was great, but never improved. Federer’s coach never made Federer’s backhand better than it was. He just kept it the same, just as his forehand and serve. Nadal however under Toni, improved in many parts of his game. Harder flatter forehand, harder backhand, better serve and better volleys. Roger Federer was great but never got greater. Federer’s coach did not see the need for it, or did not know how to do it.
It is an opinion of the famous tennis coach Robert Lansdorp. If you like the blog, please Like TennisConsult.com on Facebook!
I thought this was just boring transmission in Spanish, no one says anything more than what the eyes see except Javier Frana, it was best to lower the volume.
I really don’t get your coaching Mr. You are the one that is always coaching players to hit the ball flatter and harder over the net!!! And you are talking about players keeping the ball on other players strike zone?? The easiest balls to hit are the ones that come low and straight, that allows a player to move side do side only.
You are also congratulating Rafael Nadal??? You are the one that mention that the famous USTA Ball that players hit varying high spins, angles are no good for you. I don’t get it when you talk about USTA balls because 90% of the world are using different spins and grips to move the ball around In order to win points. I do respect I would like for you to explain how your strategies would win matches on today’s tour…
I complimented Nadal on his improving of his game. Hitting the ball FLATTER than before. His backhand is as flat as you can make it. And in due time I will explain the reversed forehand to you. And a Academy ball is a ball that clears the net about 6 feet with lots of top spin.
Well!!! I think all coaches should stop using the word FLAT shots to players. If you really pay close attention to the trajectory of balls from side to side as a coach you can see that none of the balls at today’s speed can go through the air FLAT and still drop in.
Balls are going straighter, lower or higher over the net. The ball that Nadal hits on backhand is faster and lower over the net but that balls is spinning over the air so fast and that’s why the ball drops in. There is not such thing as flat balls- they will go straight to the fence if there is no spin on the ball- it is just Fisics.
Don’t you think players should be able to learn and use all different spins, hights and angles to be successful on today’s game?
Don’t you think a player should hit the ball 6 feet over the net when they are stretched 5-10 feet back to the court to get back on the point?
It would be great to hit every ball fast, low and deep all the time !! But it is impossible to succeed like that on the tour, maybe on the juniors.
Yeah, right, Paulo Catani that’s why nobody can beat Serena, because she hits the ball too hard and low. I never said keep the ball in your opponents strike zone ,if it hurts you. I said that Wozniacki hit the ball too much in Georgi’s strike zone. In the next match Georgi did not get the same ball and she was not the same player. I am not taking anything away from Georgi. I wish she was ranked in the top ten. Very attractive, very athletic , and can strike a great ball. Remember Paulo CONSISTENCY , PLACEMENT ,POWER in that order. Don’t know why you are arguing with me. Most 2 handers hit the ball fairly flat, some topspin but fairly flat and the forehand usually has a little more spin on the ball , but is hit hard and appears flatter even with topspin. Isner has improved his forehand by hitting the ball flatter than before. None of the top tenners hit the ball consistently 6 SIX feet over the net with topspin .
I coached Giorgi and worked with her on/off for nearly 4 plus years. Her win over Woziacki was no surprise. It would have been a surprise if she had not won. Wozniacki shot for shot has really nothing to hurt Giorgi with. Giorgi is one of the very few girls around the 70’s WTA which is a legit top 10 level player. Her only problem at the moment is that occasionally her strengths turn into her weakness. Her top end is the top of the game, unfortunately her bottom end she can lose to players at nearly any ranking to the 150’s.
I completely agree with the view of the commentators.
“I like Rafael Nadal better than Roger Federer and for this reason, Federer was great, but never improved. Federer’s coach never made Federer’s backhand better than it was. He just kept it the same, just as his forehand and serve. Nadal however under Toni, improved in many parts of his game. Harder flatter forehand, harder backhand, better serve and better volleys. Roger Federer was great but never got greater. Federer’s coach did not see the need for it, or did not know how to do it.”
This is a pretty brilliant and accurate insight. I believe that Paul Annacone doesn’t offer Roger any technical advice, at least that’s what I read somewhere. You’re correct, I don’t see any improvements in Federer’s game unlike Nadal’s, Murray’s, Djokovic’s…they all improved some aspects of their game in the recent years. Federer is stagnating.
I understand what you are saying but Federer won so much for how long ??? He was the greatest and most wins on grand slams ever for years!!!! He does not need to change anything other than his Intensity on matches. He already achieved so much in his life that he just wants to enjoy his last years on your. Sampras did not change anything on his game before winning his last grand slam after media and people tought he was done!!!
Tennis has its generations and we just have to appreciate it. Players are stronger, faster than ever and It is still amaze that Federer can compete against this guys !!!
…and when you’re stagnating, you’re actually moving back.
Mr. Lansdorp,
May I respectfully submit to you that your vast and extremely successful experience is translated into usable articles that we can use as coaches and parents for kids of the next generation. All the babble over what is wrong or not is just noise. Give us insights into the serve, the motion, logic etc. a great match or why is Isner number 14 and why he may or not move, what is missing in his game or something like that.
Listen Javier, I have no time to write a book. I just gave a tiny bit of my thoughts by some ones request. And look what it did . Got you all hot and irritated. My small input of what I thought of the U S Open does not include a lesson of how to hit a ball. And if you think that all I do is make noise, I wont criticize what you think. May be you can write me an article on what TIMING means to you. What causes bad timing and can you correct it? I’m pretty sure the gentleman be happy to put it on his site. Love to read it Javier and I wont criticize you. Might not agree with you, but wont put you down. Is that a deal ??
Had to laugh at this. I do like your direct style Mr Lansdorp and would love to read your insights into timing – or anything else that crosses your mind. More please. I too am sick of hyper topspin – slow, safe, boring. Hit it for cryin out loud.
There are so much to say and so many theory in the game of tennis. Many comments by Robert is very direct and to the point. In the case of Li Na where Robert commented that she is so hot and cold which I believed she needs to stop switching coaches. She was able to hit and drive the ball well until recently switching to the new coach that have her spinning the balls up. This is allowing her opponents to come in on her and take advantage of the balls sitting up. Just like the match between her and Serena. Li Na, big mistake on the switch. Yes, compliments to Nadal which always fights with the heart of a lion. Always trying to find ways to improve. Continue on next page.
Continuation: Yes Nadal is hitting harder and flatter now, but he has the worst stokes possible. Yes, his spinning is heavy and high, but every player is playing on his terms. You need to get aggressive on his balls, like Novak had been doing and suddenly stopped. You cannot play on the baseline against Nadal. If you watch his matches carefully, 70-80% of his balls do not pass the service line. For example, if you adapt to a game like James Blake’s, I’ll guarantee you will beat Nadal. Just want to clarify something for Paulo Catani about hitting flat balls. A flatter shot can be made consistently if you know how to use your racquet positioning correctly and by practicing the technique repetitively.
Robert has also mention on his comment on Roger and his coaches. No changes in his game and no new adaptations. He is trying to come in on the balls more often now, but is not enough. I had written to Tony Roche way back when he was coaching Roger at the time. I had made suggestions that Roger needs to change his game against Nadal or he will have problems playing him. For instance, in the past Nadal’s weak side was his backhand. I had suggested that, why Roger keeps playing to his forehand when Roger’s forehand plays to Nadal’s backhand. Also, Roger should have played him by continuing to step in on the balls and take time away from Nadal. Stop playing Nadal on the baseline and allowing the balls to jump up high to his backhand which is unnatural to hit a ball that high. If you look back just a few years when Novak readjusted his game over the season break and came out on fire against Nadal; beating him 7 straight times. The way Novak did it by attacking Nadal backhand from previous 19% to 57%. Developed a more compact and faster stroke, plus stepping into his shots which reduces Nadal’s time to react. But, with Roger there had been no change to his game and his coaches do not have a clue to revamp and to restrategize how Roger plays other opponents.
US Open was rather boilerplate this year. My personal favorite moment was the same as last year’s oddly- Kohlschreiber taking out Isner for the second year in a row.
Landsdorp is not saying anything earth shattering here so why the controversy? USA tennis announcers are inept and pompous- that’s not new news. Maybe too many lobsters rolls in the booth combined with those egos turns them into drooling morons.
Landsdorp’s other brief comments about essentially not hitting the ball, be it style or placement, in a fashion that your opponent is not particularly revolutionary- just tried and true tactical advice.
Now if you want to beat Nadal do the following:
1) Get on the ball early and go over the ball as often as possible inside the or on the baseline;
2)Hit flat and hard into his forehand (see Gilles Simon at the year end versus Nadal a few years back);
3) Hit a lot of short angles off into the service boxes (see P. Kohlschreiber v. Nadal)- particularly on his backhand side);
4) Approach down the middle;
5) Make him serve down the middle on the ad side and take away the middle on the deuce side when he serves;
That’s a start.
As for the US Open let’s not forget about those cheap towels that were falling apart on the players faces when they wiped off. Perhaps that was symbolic.
Edit to above comment:
“that your opponent likes”
Interesting comments. I commented in Spanish for ESPN International. I agree that there is not much depth in the technical area in today’s commentators. I did have the time to write a couple of books and author several DVDs about modern tennis technique. I agree that spin is necessary to control the power of today’s racquet. Top players hit above 2,000 RPM in all strokes, including serves, groundstrokes sometimes exceed 4,000 RPM, a bit less than 2,000 on volleys. That elicits longer contact with the strings and longer feel.
We can talk forever who the greatest player was, and pretty soon it will be Nadal, if we listen to John McEnroe, who changes his mind as often as baby’s change diapers. If we don’t take in consideration the change in equipment, or what ever, I think Laver was the greatest. He was not able to play for 4 years in the grand slams. He won it before they did not allow him to play and won it again with open tennis. Take 4 years away from Sampras or Federer during their prime, and see where they rate. I might also give my opinion why Federer has, or had, a difficult time with Nadal. But every time I give an opinion, I irritate a lot of you, so may be I’ll just keep it for my students.
Hi Robert,
Don’t worry about what the others think and give me your opinion why Federer has had a difficult time with Nadal. Curious to what your thoughts are on this.
When I was a junior I worked with Myron McNamara from the Riviera Tennis Club. Interesting that you teach the game in a similar manner that he did. I loved working with him. He always made me smile.