2012年2月15日 星期三

You've got to be LINdding me!!!

Jeremy Lin's game-winner against Rap helped Knicks win six streak games.




2012年2月13日 星期一

奪走巨人隊的光采:林書豪—籃壇的Tim Tebow,零度太陽處女

Robert Phoenix » Giant Buzz Kill; Introducing Jeremy Lin, B-Ball’s Tim Tebow, Zero Degree Virgo Sunshine


February 11th, 2012 @ 7:45 pm by Robert Phoenix



Linsane in the membrane.
林來瘋失控中


The universe has a wicked sense of humor. The New York Nephillim, I mean Giants, barely had a chance to shine in the glow of the Super Bowl’s lesser light when some Taiwanese-American kid with a crew cut, who by the way, also happens to be a Tim Tebowesque Christian, has taken New York by storm and somehow managed to eclipse the Giant achievement. Yes, I’m talking about Jeremy Lin.

宇宙有個惡趣味的幽默;紐約懼人,呃我是說巨人幾乎沒時間好好享受贏超級盃的滋味,因為這位平頭台裔美籍小子,剛好也像Tim Tebow一樣是基督徒,如風暴一般席捲紐約,把巨人隊奪冠的光環完全掩蓋。是的,我就是在說林書豪。


If you don’t know who Jeremy Lin is, I guarantee that if he keeps playing the way he has been, you will.

如果還不知道誰是林書豪,我跟你保證他再這樣打下去你就會知道他是誰了


Let’s get the key astro stuff out of the way, do a little back story, then drill down.

我們把關鍵星盤找出來,做一翻背景調查,並開始研究。

2012年2月11日 星期六

2012年2月4日 星期六

球員分析 - Tsonga, Isner, Soderling

From RF.com feddy052377 Written on: 01/29/2012 | 07:24 AM

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。

2012年2月3日 星期五

澳網四強 (上半籤)

From RF.com feddy052377 Written on: 01/29/2012 | 03:56 AM



As for Djoko/Murray, I mentioned at the start of the tournament that that was a 50-50 match and it was. It's not that Djoko was playing particularly poorly (even though both he and Murray were playing badly), but that it's an awkward matchup. Murray has defeated Djoko plenty of times on hard courts. His return is just as good, BH just as good, first serve is bigger although he didn't display it, volleys better, and his defense is just as good. If Murray comes to play, that matchup is always going to be awkward and tight.


至於Djoko/Murray這場,錦標開始時我提過這場比賽五五波,看來也是。不是說Djoko打得不好(雖說他跟Murray都沒打得很好),但這對戰很奇怪。Murray在硬地上打敗過Djoko很多次,他接發球很好,反拍也很好,雖然不太穩定但他的一發也很快,截擊不錯,防守更是絕佳。如果是Murray來打,比賽一定都是會比較接近。




On another note, the tour might want to take a look at the ugly nature of the Djoko/Murray match to see the future of the tour. Neither player could hit through the other on this court and because of the other's defense. There was no where to go. Every player is going to play like this in the future to maximize their chances because this style of play with today's courts yields results and reduces the variance in results, i.e., no ups and downs really, make the other player win with his offense and if his offense isn't good enough, then you win.


另一方面,官方可能要看看這場比賽的特性來想未來巡迴賽的樣貌會怎樣。因為對方優異的防守,沒有一個人能打出致勝球,這是沒辦法的辦法。每個球員未來都得這樣打來增加自己贏球的機會,因為這種打法最適合現今的場地特性,也減低了輸球的變因,也不會有什麼起伏。反正就是讓另一個球員用攻擊贏球,如果他攻擊不太好,那你就贏了。

2012 澳網決賽用時真相

Length of Aussie final didn't add up



By Kamakshi Tandon Special to ESPN.com

……

But just as the numbers don't do justice to the drama of the contest and the quality of certain stages of Sunday's match, they don't quite tell the full story about its length, either.

就像數字沒法說明禮拜天決賽的精采與品質一樣,它們也沒說明決賽用時的真相。

2012 澳網決賽 Time to reflect...

By Jim Courier 

"It’s hard to get my head wrapped around the physical effort I saw Sunday night in Melbourne, even a few days later. The tennis Novak and Rafa were able to summon late in the match boggles my mind. Ivan Lendl and I were talking about it Monday morning on our way back to the States, and both of us were shaking our heads and asking the same question: How could they possibly not cramp up out there? Ivan and I were known to be among the fittest of our time, but neither of us felt like we could have possibly made it through the way those guys did. It was a hot night (Novak changed his first shirt at the 30-minute mark) and the rallies were brutal from the get-go.

即使幾天過後,我還是無法理解決賽他們倆人的體力到底哪來的。Novak與Rafa比賽後段越打越好這點真是令我費解。Ivan Lendl與我回美國的路上有談到這個,我們都想不透並有著同樣的疑問:他們怎麼可能沒抽筋?Ivan跟我以前都以體力著名,但都不認為自己可以像他們那樣打。那晚很熱(Novak半小時就換了第一件球衣),一開始對抽更是激烈。

Whatever it is that these guys are drinking/eating on court, I want some immediately to stave off my jet lag."

不管他們場上喝或是吃啥,我想要一點來趕走我的時差疲勞。

weak public statement but we get it....

Yeah, we certainly did, didn't we? XDDD

2012年2月2日 星期四

Gotta Admire Your Highness...

From RF.com Nacciyar Written on: 01/28/2012 | 10:19 PM



Nadal is only 7 Slams away. He seems immune to pressure, because he's never felt the pressure forever deflecting it on to someone else, usually Roger. 

Nadal現在也只差七座,他好想對壓力有免疫力,因為他總是把壓力丟個另一個人,那人通常是Roger


So, I don't think it will be as hard to achieve the Slam total for him as it was Roger...with Roger everyone expected him to be spectacular even before he won a title. The talk of breaking Pete's record had started when he was still in single digits.

所以我認為跟Roger比起來他要贏大滿貫數相對簡單。Roger還沒贏得第一個冠軍前,大家就已經期待他能打得出色了,甚至他還只有各位數個大滿貫冠軍時,大家就已經在講他會破Pete的紀錄。


Nadal has benefited enormously from Roger's presence. Furthermore, for the first few years he was "just" a clay courter, and when he made a mark on other surfaces, everyone was surprised. Wow, look at this boy who tries so hard. We shouldn't expect him to win, because, look he's already trying so hard.

Nadal因為Roger在他前面而受惠良多;不僅如此,前幾年他還只是個打紅土的,當他開始在其他場地嶄露頭角,大家很驚訝。“哇屋,看這個大男孩多努力啊,我們不應該期待他要拿冠軍,看,他已經這麼努力了。”


Furthermore, Nadal hasn't had to do deal with the pressure of not winning one of the 4 majors. He won USO 10, gift wrapped to him...so, there's no striving for the goal.

Nadal也不用面對沒集滿四大滿貫的壓力,10美網根本是送他的,也沒有要為某個目標努力的動力。


Of course, no one talks about his abysmal performance at the WTF, and indeed, it appears that the media diminishes that tournament's significance, saying it's at the tail end, everyone is tired or injured etc.

當然也不會有人提起他在年終賽的濫表現,確實媒體也一直詆毀年終賽的重要性,反正到了年底大家也累了、傷了。


It says something about the homogeneity of court surfaces and the balls when both Nadal and Djokovic have won 3 Slams in a year. When Roger did it (3 times) it was considered incredible. Just to win Wimbledon/RG back to back was considered a feat! Now, all of this is par for the course.

場地無差異性、用球改變多少也說明了為何NadalDjokovic可以在一年贏三個大滿貫。Roger達成此成就時(三次)大家認為這很了不起,連贏溫法網還是件大事呢!現在,這一切也沒什麼特別的了。



From RF.com feddy052377  Written on: 01/28/2012 | 10:41 PM

A lot of really good stuff here. 7 slams is still a lot and no easy feat, but a win today will send him hurtling closer to his goal.

這篇有很多不錯的論點,七座大滿貫還是很多也不簡單達到,但今天這場贏下來會讓他離目標更近。


Great point about the early pressure on Federer practically ever since his fourth slam win , i.e., the 2004 USO. After that amazing performance, everyone talked about him possibly becoming the greatest ever and the talk of the career slam and grand slam started then and put pressure on Federer for a long time. In addition, ever since 2006, statistically the greatest season in ATP tour history along with perhaps JMac's '84 season, people have pestered Federer about RN. People were calling RN the "real #1" during Fed's 2006 year!

有關Federer還沒打比賽就要面對壓力這講得太好了,這大概是從他的第四個大滿貫,04美網開始。自從他決賽的鬼神表現後,大家都在講他可能成為史上最佳,生涯大滿貫啦、破14座紀錄啦,這些壓力從此長久環繞在Federer身邊。而且2006年的戰績大概是JMAC1984年之後ATP史上最好的,此後大家就一直拿Nadal來煩他,那年大家還叫Nadal真正的球王咧~                                  


Having Fed a repository of deflected pressure has indeed greatly benefited RN although it can be said that had it not been for Federer's tremendous play, RN might already have a good argument for GOAT as he would have had the most weeks ever at #1 (RN had enough points in 2005-2007 to be #1 in most years).

Roger有個壓力儲藏室真的讓Nadal受惠不少,雖然也可以說成要不是有Roger驚人的成就,RN搞不好已經可以跟GOAT扯上邊,因為他會有多禮拜的第一紀錄(RN05~07的積分在任何年份都已經足夠讓他當上第一)。


Unfortunately for Federer, most people will forget about all of his extraordinary achievements, cf.,
wikipedia page as the achievements are too numerous to enumerate which make the case for him as GOAT IF RN gets close to the slam count. Federer is so much more than the slam count. His level of success over the past eight years or so is simply unparallelled; he has been greatness personified on every surface, at every tournament, seemingly NEVER blown out, and always in every match against every opponent on every surface. His F's, SFs, QFs streaks, his streak of winning titles, streak against top 10 opponents, overall against the top 10, etc., etc., will all be overlooked if RN gets close to 16 because of the H-to-H advantage, even though that advantage is the result of unique historical parameters.

不幸的是對Federer來說大家會忘記他所有超凡的成就,維基百科上的紀錄多到不勝枚舉,如果RN接近他的大滿貫數的話,以他的各項紀錄來說他就是史上最佳,Federer的成就根本不只有大滿貫冠軍數。過去八年他成就的等級根本無與倫比,他是每個場地、每個錦標的最佳詮釋;看起來每場比賽對上每個對手在每種場地,他從沒慘敗過。如果RN接近他的大滿貫冠軍數的話,因為對戰戰績的關係,他的連續決賽、四強、八強紀錄,連續贏得冠軍的紀錄、連續對上Top10贏球的紀錄、對上Top 10的總戰績……等等都會被忽略,雖然說這對戰戰績的結果是因為特殊的對戰組合與球風相剋。

2012年2月1日 星期三

慢場地 VS 球員打法

From RF.com feddy052377 Written on: 01/29/2012 | 03:50 AM




There's a lot of truth in what you write. I agree with the fact that this AO was one of the most boring grand slams I have ever watched, and I would say that had Federer defeated RN.

你所說的有很多是真的。我同意今年澳網是我看過是最無聊的一個大滿貫,就算Nadal打敗Federer也一樣。


As for the other players not stepping up against AM, ND, an RN, I think it's fundamentally due to the paradigm shift that's occurred in tennis. I had this discussion with RickyRoger last year. I cannot believe and would not have believed it 20 years ago if someone had told me that the first serve isn't as important as it used to be and that first strike tennis is almost at a disadvantage now. 

再來是其他球員挺身而出來對抗AMNDRN,我想這基本上得歸因於網球上發生的重大變革,去年我跟RickyRoger討論過,20年前有人跟我說發球這一球之始不會再那麼重要,甚至現在幾乎成為缺點,我不會相信,20年前也不會相信。


ND, AM, and RN play the %s better than anyone else in the history of the game. They can win without a first serve and when they do get in a first serve, it's a bonus. Compare this to players such as Sampras, Becker, Federer, etc. If they're having an off night getting first serves in, they're vulnerable. There's a chance of an upset if that's the case. Federer has avoided those early upsets because, unlike first strike players of the past, he plays tremendous defense and can neutralize big games. AM, ND, and RN play tremendous defense, neutralize big games (especially AM and ND) wear you down, and force you to hit big and serve big throughout a match. You can defeat them if you do so THROUGHOUT a match, but it's very, very difficult to do so with today's balls and courts.. Big hitters know this and when they falter just a bit, they know that they've lost a lot of momentum and they never get it back. They know what an uphill grind it will be against those guys. This is why you see AM, ND, and RN at the ends of tournaments every time and it's not going to change anytime soon.

從來沒人比NDAMRN會打安全球,沒一發他們也可以贏球,有一發就當賺到。比起其他球員如Sampras, Becker, Federer,如果他們突然某場比賽找不到一發就麻煩了,還有可能因此輸球。Federer能避免這些爆冷是因為與其他過往大砲不同,他的防守極佳,能抵銷掉對手的攻擊。AMNDRN球風極度防守,不僅把對手攻擊抵銷(特別是AMND),還讓你在底線累個半死,逼你整場比賽催出最快的一發、打出最誇張的致勝球。你能整場比賽都這樣打當然能打敗他們,但因為時下的場地速度與用球,能做到也是非常困難的事。攻擊型球員當然也知道如此,所以只要他們一抖就知道自己要輸掉氣勢而且很難再扳平,跟這些球員打就像在爬坡。這就是為什麼AMNDRN每次都能打到最後,而且這現象短期內也不會改變。

場地速度之於 Roger 打法之於未來網球發展 XD

From RF.com RickyRoger Written on: 01/30/2012 | 09:24 PM


I'm in the middle of writing an exhausting essay on friggin' ACL injuries and it's driving me nuts, so I'll weigh in (after a long long time) here in depth on what I think about the surface wars, as a "break".

For me, the bottom line right now is this: yes, now everything "major" is slow. But to be honest, now is not 2007 or even 2008. And in 2007, in spite of the grass being slower, Roger should never have gone five sets with Nadal at Wimbledon, and had no business losing to him in 2008 either. It was the result of a steady progression of passive play in his game, and an increasing unwillingness to put the ball exactly where he wanted to put it in a transition sense that led to those losses, and all of this happened when he let go of Roche. He is only again playing "his" brand of tennis now, with Annacone around, in the last couple of years, and there's a sense of "too little too late" that has come with it since the real "death" in speed at majors occurred sometime in 2009/10/11. Or at least, it was that drop in speed that actually affected him to the extent it has now. The AO has been progressively slower since 2008 once Plexicushion Prestige was laid down. Each year I see it either taking more spin or causing higher bounce, this year it was more speed than bounce, but it clearly affected Roger's penetration.


我認為現在重點是:沒錯,大滿貫場地現在都比較慢了,但說實在的現在也不是2007或2008,2007年就算草地變比較慢,Roger 也沒必要跟Nadal打到五盤,2008年那場更不應該輸他。這是他打法越來越被動、還有不願把球打到他想要運用的位置才導致輸球,而這些都是在Roche離開後發生。前幾年請Annacone後他才又開始自己的網球,但這一切不免讓人有“於事無補”的感覺,因為大滿貫場地變慢是發生在09、10、11年的某時,或至少是場地速度下降也多少影響到他。澳網場地從08年改換Plexicushion Prestige後速度就越變越慢,每年我看澳網不是球上旋越來越多就是彈跳越來越高,今年是速度比較快彈跳比較低,但這也影響 Roger的致勝球。


I urge you guys to watch the 2007 and 2008 USO matches. The courts were still quick and slick. Murray was clueless, and Djokovic thrived in 2007 in NYC because he played a far more attacking and exciting brand of tennis then. From 2009, however, the speed has just DIED there. I'm not sure if they changed the Decoturf that year in some way, but there was a change.


我強烈建議大家去看2007和2008的美網比賽,場地還是很快很光滑。Murray那時一無所知,Djokovic 2007年在紐約發光發熱是因為那時他打的是比現在更具攻擊、更刺激的比賽。然而2009後美網場地速度就不見了,我不確定他們是否那年把Decoturf換掉,但確實有改變。


As far as Wimbledon goes, I'm sorry: there is no excuse for losing to Nadal on that surface, whatever Nadal's new tactics involved. There is a reason he steamrolled everyone even in 2007 and 2008 on that surface other than Nadal, in 2008 not even dropping a set until the final, and winning in 2009. Even now, as bouncy and slow as it may seem, it is grass, and a final at SW19 still looks considerably faster than any other major final. It is for this reason that Roger's loss to Tsonga confounded me last year, since I believed he was past that passive play with Annacone in tow. I still hold that he was injured in that tournament, and think his best shot is still either there or at RG.


至於溫布頓,很抱歉但我告訴你在那邊輸給Nadal是沒有任何藉口的,不管Nadal有啥新戰術。為什麼除了Nadal,他07、08年能在草地每一輪都強壓對手?08年決賽前他更是一盤未失,09年也在那邊奪冠。甚至現在草地看來高彈跳速度也變慢,但它畢竟是草地,就算是溫布頓的決賽看起來還是比其他大滿貫決賽還快。正因如此去年Roger輸給Tsonga讓我很困惑,因為我相信請Annacone後他已經丟棄那種保守打法了。我還是認為去年溫網他有傷,而他在法網或溫網的機會還是最大。


Right now, indeed, things are ridiculous. And ironically, Roger's new game (and it's not the game he played from mid 2007 to mid 2010) does not hold up well against the top 4 anywhere other than at RG and Wimbledon because of the quicker balls. And even there, he needs to avoid Rafa due to the mental match-up. The furrow in his brow is amply evident when he sees Rafa across the net, compared to other players who beat him more often recently such as Tsonga, Novak and Del Potro. He figures them out, uses his amazing defense on the slower courts to find position again, but against Rafa, the match-up puts him all at sea. He really does need a draw to open up for him at this stage, much like it did at the AO 2010, though he did play sublime baseline tennis in that tournament, and fully deserved the win whatever his opposition was. Unfortunately, the draw is unlikely to open up at all barring injury to the "other 3", and I mean an actual injury, not the sitting-down-in-a-chair brand. Until then, no big hitter will hit them off court since there is no place for those sorts of contenders in modern major tennis. That Roger would be able to beat them on a decently fast court was amply evident at the WTF last year, but at a major, Roger will continue to struggle against Rafa and Novak.


現在情況確實是很荒繆沒錯,諷刺的是Roger的新打法(不是他07年到10年中的打法)除了在法網跟溫網外,對top 4球員並沒有啥威脅,因為法溫網用比較快的球。就算在那裡,因為心魔他也必須避開Nadal—他看Nadal在網子對面時的眉頭深鎖就是最有力的証明,但對其他近來打敗他更多次的其他球員如Tsonga、Del Potro、Novak他卻不會這樣。他摸清他們的底,在慢速場地用絕佳的底線防守來讓自己腳步到位;但對Nadal,這相剋的對戰組合讓他無所適從。他這年紀真的需要好籤來奪冠,就像2010年澳網一樣;雖然那年他底線功力一流,誰當對手他都值得奪冠。不幸的是除了top 3受傷外,Roger籤運很難再好了,而且我指的是真正的受傷,不是那種“坐到爛椅子”的那種傷。在那之前沒有攻擊型球員會打敗他們,因為現代網球沒有他們的位置。Roger還是能在夠快的場地打敗他們,去年年終賽就是鐵証;但在大滿貫賽,Roger還是會對Nadal跟Djo打得掙扎。


To draw a parallel in a sport I play more seriously now, squash; in the mid 90s, it was quite simply impossible to watch a professional squash match. Rallies lasted FIVE MINUTES in some cases. At some point in the early 2000s, officials and fans had had enough. Drastic changes came into play that immediately favoured attacking players. Scores were changed to allow fewer ups and downs in momentum. The balls changed things completely. Courts were made more and more "dead" to make sure winners stayed winners. And out of the blue, more and more attacking players emerged from nations with a penchant for flair such as France and Egypt, and they now frequently occupy the top 5 spots.


跟我現在打得比較認真的運動—壁球來做比較;90年代中是不太可能看一場職業壁球賽的。有些比賽裡對抽時間長達五分鐘,2000早期官方跟球迷終於受夠了,鉅大的變革讓攻擊型球員受惠,分數也改成較穩定的記法,減少球員間氣勢消長。新球徹底改變一切,場地也越來越“死”來確保致勝球就是致勝球。突然間攻擊型球員如雨後春筍般從各國冒出,尤其是法國與埃及的那種天才型球員,他們現在長據世界前五。


Understandably, because of its far smaller stature, these kinds of changes were easy in squash. It still is "about the sport", so to speak. Prize money is laughable, and in the words of one great number one, "You have to be an idiot to play this sport for money." It truly is enjoying a golden age, and I believe it shares remarkable similarities with tennis' real golden age in the 60s and 70s, when a sense of actual camaraderie was prevalent, when players had a beer after a match in a major, when they would drive from one tournament to the next. Tennis was played for pure joy. Of course, with the way tennis has grown now, the money that has come into it is no doubt a wonderful thing, but I do wonder what its done for the kid that likes to serve big, hit big, and hell, once in a while, hopp. I like to be optimistic in spite of all this, and believe that this monotony HAS to change. The players are there: DP, Dolgopolov, Roger, Berankis, Dimitrov. I just wonder if they'll ever have that chance, that opportunity to have their Federer-beats-Sampras moment in a world where the odds are stacked against them.


可以理解的是因為壁球的影響力較小,這些改變相對簡單。說到底這還是“為了運動好”,獎金是很可笑的,套句某位球王的話:「白痴才為了錢打球。」黃金年代時真的是這樣,我相信網壇真正黃金年代—60、70年代也是如此,那時大家都有同袍情誼,大比賽完還會一起喝酒,這個錦標打完還會一起開車到下一個錦標去,打網球是打開心的。當然網球因為錢變成這樣也是件美事,但我不禁會想這些改變對想當巨砲、打致勝球的小朋友有什麼影響呢?甚至對Roger的影響?即使如此我還是傾向樂觀看待這一切,並相信這單一性必須改變。還是有這些球員:Del Potro、Dolgopolov、Roger、Berankis、Dimitrov。我只是懷疑當全世界都不看好他們,他們能否有那種機會,有個機遇可以擁有像Federer打敗Sampras的那種時刻。

Come on ITF, give us a squash rennaissance.

來吧國際網球協會,給我們個壁球復興!