O/T Wimbledon Final Replay

[Craig Van Egmond]

Tom,

         The Jack Kramer was one sweet racket.  

        http://www.woodtennis.com/newWood/wilsonjackkramer3.jpg

          After the T2000, I had a Bancroft Borg as shown at this link...

          http://www.woodtennis.com/borg/bancroftborgpersonal1.jpg

          Then of course it was the Donnay Borg Pro...

           http://www.woodtennis.com/borg/newBorgPro.jpg

          Even had the cool headband.... massive topspin.... two handed backhand.. just not the game.  ;D

         Still have the rackets somewhere....

[Mark Pearce]

Almost nobody serves and volleys like they used to.  Slower balls, slower courts and bigger rackets have made Wimbledon yet another baseline tournament, with just occasional visits to the net.  The artistry of a McEnroe simply isn't seen anymore, very sadly.

I think it is almost impossible to have serve and volley tennis these days.  If the courts and balls are fast enough for serve and volley to work, then they are probably so fast that returning serve becomes near impossible.  Whilst I enjoyed the serve and volley game, i am glad the tournament has tried to slow the game down so that it didnt become a game of not much more than serving.  

Nonsense.  There must be a speed at which serve and volley is possible and effective, otherwise it would never have succeeded.

[JLahrman]

I think Roger Federer may have a legitimate gripe about your comment re lack of artistry in the game. The man's a genius and a joy to watch.

I agree with you Ed, but he's still not a serve and volleyer.

[Phil Benedict]

I don't think serve and volley is emphasized at the junior level anymore, a trend which pre-dates high tech rackets.  It's easier to teach baseline tennis and success comes earlier.  Look at all the products of Bolletieri's academy - none of them play serve and volley.  It's harder to succeed at the junior level playing serve and volley because juniors don't have big serves and volleying technique is hard to learn.

All the great Aussies played serve and volley, but with the arrival of Borg, Conners and Lendl the style lost favor.  I see no reason why someone with a big serve and a willingness to fail at the junior level couldn't succeed playing serve/volley.  Sampras did it, but he was force fed serve and volley by a coach who wanted him to win Wimbledon and had the best combination of first and second serve in modern tennis.

[Tom Zeni]

Craig,

Cool pics. But guess what? I still have my Jack Kramer in it's wooden tennis press! What great memories.

As for shoes, we began with Converse. They wore too quickly, and at the cost of $8.00 per pair, my parents were growing weary of that. Then along came the standard in tennis shoes, the classic white Stan Smith's with the green lip on the heel. So cool.

What made them so great were the hundreds of individual round treads on the base of the sole that provided great traction and movement. When I saw Connors wearing them, I knew they were for me. And to this day -  when I can find them - I still wear them! Now that's classic.

[Jim Nugent]

Here are my next questions.  Could Federer do anything to improve his clay court game, so he stands a better chance of beating a healthy Nadal?  Any special training, either skill-wise or physical?  Would that hurt the rest of his game?  And even if it did, would it be worth it, to fill in the one missing hole in his career?  

[David_Elvins]

Almost nobody serves and volleys like they used to.  Slower balls, slower courts and bigger rackets have made Wimbledon yet another baseline tournament, with just occasional visits to the net.  The artistry of a McEnroe simply isn't seen anymore, very sadly.

I think it is almost impossible to have serve and volley tennis these days.  If the courts and balls are fast enough for serve and volley to work, then they are probably so fast that returning serve becomes near impossible.  Whilst I enjoyed the serve and volley game, i am glad the tournament has tried to slow the game down so that it didnt become a game of not much more than serving.  

Nonsense.  There must be a speed at which serve and volley is possible and effective, otherwise it would never have succeeded.

Not nonsense at all.  Style of game is dependant on two speeds - speed through the air, speed after the ball bounces.   With the speed that modern players now serve the ball thorugh the air, players cannot regularly return the serves on ultra-fast grass courts.  Serve volley players will no doubt be effective but most rallies wont progress past the serve, reducing the volley element and making the game one-dimensional.  When the grass courts are slowed down to allow more serves to be returned, you take away the advantage of the serve volleyer who needs a fast surface to be effective.  

[Phil Benedict]

Here are my next questions.  Could Federer do anything to improve his clay court game, so he stands a better chance of beating a healthy Nadal?  Any special training, either skill-wise or physical?  Would that hurt the rest of his game?  And even if it did, would it be worth it, to fill in the one missing hole in his career?  

The conventional wisdom is that Federer needs to commit to play aggressive tennis over 5 sets to have a chance on clay against Rafa.  He can't just engage in one baseline rally after another because Nadal will eventually break down his backhand.  This means mixing it up and coming to the net to end points quickly.

The problem of course is execution.  It isn't that Federer is a poor clay court player.  Unlike Sampras or any top American player, he grew up on the surface and has the movement right.  He knows how to slide.  It's just that Nadal is so tough on clay, combining incredible stamina, determination and heavy topspin in a close to invincible package.  One loss in 90 matches!

I watched the French Open final the last two years and it's obvious from his demeanor and body language that Federer doesn't believe he can beat Nadal in Paris.