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。

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。

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Nadal與Djokovic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JMAC的1984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（RN在05~07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。

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AM、ND或RN，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ND、AM和RN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。AM、ND和RN球風極度防守，不僅把對手攻擊抵銷（特別是AM與ND），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AM、ND與RN每次都能打到最後，而且這現象短期內也不會改變。