The Australian Open has been very interesting and eventful this year. The men's final is about to start. The men's tournament has been characterised by stun defeats, with a large margin. Look at the way Federer defeated his friend, Djokovich defeated Federer, Ferrer defeated Nadal, and Murray defeated Nadal, all in a very convincing manner. That makes the margin of defeat cumulatively very large. The winner would actually, theoritically, be way ahead of the others.
There is an emergence of a new breed of good players, so we're able to move away from the Federer-Nadal fixation. Federer and Nadal have both had their best chance this time in the Australian Open. Nadal could've won the fantastic four and Federer could've added to his tally. I don't think both of them would have a chance later. I think their time is about over.
Meanwhile in the women's segment, the final was the highlight. Kim Clijsters prevailed over Li Na, but only after a real contest. The match was more about who would hold on to their serve, rather than who would break the other's serve. It made me think whether, for women especially, the serve is actually a disadvantage. Their return of serve was much better than the serve itself.
There are two reasons for this, as I see it. The serve cannot be done with two hands, whereas the backhand return, why even the forehand return, Nadal would confirm, can be done with two hands. Thats more power and precision at your disposal. The second reason is that the serve is done from high above, and with lesser power of the women, actually goes slower than other shots.
A thought. If the rules permit, why can't the women serve like they play shots. Have to read up the rules of tennis to find out if that is feasible.
There is an emergence of a new breed of good players, so we're able to move away from the Federer-Nadal fixation. Federer and Nadal have both had their best chance this time in the Australian Open. Nadal could've won the fantastic four and Federer could've added to his tally. I don't think both of them would have a chance later. I think their time is about over.
Meanwhile in the women's segment, the final was the highlight. Kim Clijsters prevailed over Li Na, but only after a real contest. The match was more about who would hold on to their serve, rather than who would break the other's serve. It made me think whether, for women especially, the serve is actually a disadvantage. Their return of serve was much better than the serve itself.
There are two reasons for this, as I see it. The serve cannot be done with two hands, whereas the backhand return, why even the forehand return, Nadal would confirm, can be done with two hands. Thats more power and precision at your disposal. The second reason is that the serve is done from high above, and with lesser power of the women, actually goes slower than other shots.
A thought. If the rules permit, why can't the women serve like they play shots. Have to read up the rules of tennis to find out if that is feasible.
No comments:
Post a Comment