Taken as a whole, these guys would have to serve really well and hit big throughout a match to win, something that's difficult to do over a best of 5 sets format. That's the "beauty" of ND's, AM's, and RN's games -- THEY don't need to have an "on" day necessarily, i.e., serve really well or hit the ball deep consistently; they can simply play the odds that the opponent can't continue hitting big and serving big the entire match.
總的來說，球員必須要發球非常好、打出致勝球才能贏得比賽，這在五盤三勝中比較難辦到；這就是ND、AM與RN比賽中的“精髓”，他們不太需要用“手感”來贏球，例如發球好或穩定地把球打深，他們只要賭對手不可能整場都維持著火熱的手感。
Individually, all of these guys have huge holes in their games.
個別來說，這些人球風上都有些大漏洞。
Tsonga -- average lateral movement during a long match, average BH, really poor return of serve. Unless he serves 70+ percent on a fast surface, he is at a disadvantage against one of AM/ND/RN because they can return his serve, he returns theirs poorly, and loses a lot of the rallies. Any service game where he misses a lot of 1st serves and he's doomed. Incidentally, he served really, really well against Federer at Wimbledon, but Federer, despite anecdotal, visceral images of that match, returned his serve well enough. Tsonga won "only" 72% of his first serve points, a number that's not really good for any surface other than clay and is nothing to write home about for grass. I think if he ever got into better shape, he would be able to get to more FHs and hit more of them. I don't know if his return can ever be improved.
Tsonga—長比賽裡移位平平、反拍平平，接發很爛。除非他一發上七成以上，對上AM、ND、RN其中一位他都不利，因為這三位不怕他的發球，但他的回發卻很糟，相持也不太有贏面，只要他一發出走就完蛋了。無獨有偶，溫網對Federer那場他發球超好，即使Federer看起來好像無法招架他的發球，其實他接Tsonga的發球接得已經夠好了；Tsonga一發得分率“只”有72%，除了紅土，這數字在任何場地真的都不太突出，當然在草地上就更沒啥好講的了。我想如果他狀況好的話，他可以更積極到位、打更多正拍；但就是不知道他的回發能不能再進步了。
Isner -- honestly, Isner's serve isn't as dominant as it seems to be. Karlovic's serve at Karlovic's prime was/is much, much better and more difficult to return. In just about every match against decent or good returners, Isner gets into trouble on a lot of his service games. His return of serve is atrocious, his BH poor, and his FH, while powerful, isn't all that versatile as he can't move his opponent around the court with it. Good players hold easily against him, while they seem to get into this serve games. He can't seem to capitalize on the fact that his opponent should feel a lot of pressure to hold and make mistakes, but his poor return of serve (not enough balls put into play) hurt his chances to break. His movement isn't bad for a huge man, but tennis isn't played in relative terms. Maybe, MAYBE he can win a lot of TBs on a fast USO court with fast balls, but that's doubtful.
Isner—坦白說，Isner的發球沒帳面上看起來那麼強勢。Karlovic的發球在他全盛時期還比較好、比較難接。每場對上好的回發者，Isner的發球局就常常會有麻煩。他的回發爛透了，反拍很糟、正拍雖然有威力卻沒啥變化，因為他無法用正拍在場上調動對手。好球員對上他保發很輕鬆，也可在他的發球局跟他纏鬥。他似乎無法好好利用一個優勢，那就是他的對手應該對自己的發球局有很大的壓力進而失誤，但他的爛回發（沒好到把球回回去打）使他破發機會下降不少。以他的身高來說，他的移位並不慢，但網球不是以相對來打的。也許，也許在美網的快速場地他可以用快速球贏很多搶七，但這還是有待討論。
Soderling -- average return of serve, and not a lot of variety on serve. On the AD side, he serves out wide too often and his "screwdriver" up the tee doesn't hug the line at all and is easy to return. He is easily put on the run and outmaneuvered because he doesn't position himself all that well and doesn't anticipate well. He does hit some big shots on the run once in a while, but for the most part, his huge hitting can be neutralized if he's put on the run. His biggest problem of all may be that he often goes through spells in a match when he misses too often (first serve and groundstrokes), gets broken and loses momentum.
Sodelring—接發普通、發球也沒啥變化。他太常在二發區發大外角，而他的“殺手鐗”中線發球也沒發在線上，對手要接沒啥困難。要調動他很簡單因為他腳步不太到位，對來球預測也不太好。偶爾跑動中會打出致勝球，但通常是他被四處調動後致勝球就會被沒收。最大的問題是只要失去一發跟抽球，他就會鬼打牆導致被破或失去氣勢。
沒有留言:
張貼留言