Tiriac:"When Federer plays it seems like he's playing the piano, while with Nadal is like he's playing the drums."

FACT

And what a drummer

FACT

FACT stands for Federation of Authorised and Confirmed Truths - not a fact.

And you need all the instruments to make a strong band...seems Tiriac is doing his best to ensure Nadal doesnt turn up for band practice next year for sure.

Could it also be deemed a fact that Tiriacis now harboring a grudge? Getting excited by this remark is akin to taking as fact a United fan saying that City don't deserve to be champions.

He wont be saying that if there is nobody interested enough to want to see the "concert" without its lead instrumentalists he may have a few empty seats lol. What is a band without a drummer. Fed may have to play the keyboard instead :D

It's a pretty old quote - at least 4 years old...

This isn't a cut and paste job from a previous posters blog now is it?

LK you are awful ...but I like ya

we all know I am good fun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE1mG9SdFUw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8aGlOj2VFo

What do you call a guy that hangs out with musicians?




























A drummer!

Nadal always was Steven Tyler to Federer's Chopin.

As usual it comes down to taste although I like a bit of both...although given my name I lean more towards the energetic side of the musical spectrum.

How do you tell if the stage is level?




The drummer is drooling from both sides of his mouth.

OK - there were problems with the surface at Madrid (not it's colour in my view) and Tiriac has admitted that. I don't think he deserves the criticism that's coming his way. Nadal & Djokovic have a very long way to go before they do a fraction of what Tiriac has done for tennis - what's the basis for this 'outrageous' remark?

Tiriac wants to make tennis something that fans like to watch, at the tournament and on screens. His desire to make money out of it is derided, but if he's making money out of it the fans are enjoying the product and more players will be wanting to play. Take a deep breath and read this Tiriac has no interest in killing the goose that lays the golden egg. As Tiriac points out, pretty much all the innovations in recent years have been achieved in the teeth of objections from players - why is that?

Players have by-and-large concentrated with tunnel vision on perfecting their art since they were young. Very few have a hinterland, a broad-minded educated view - most are pretty uneducated and a lot are pretty dumb. They can be intensely conservative because if they are working hard and succeeding at a particular version of the game they don't want, as they see it, the goalposts to be moved. If they get to the top of their sport with hard work they (quite naturally) think that they deserve it and if the papers are full of them and there are fans wanting their signatures and so on they belive that there's not much wrong with the world.

They are lucky that there are iconoclasts like Tiriac around - he'll get things wrong, he'll break a few eggs, but he wants tennis to carry on succeeding. Can you say the same of Nadal and Djokovic? Only time will tell, but the main portents are that (understandably) their success in their own careers is currently paramount, to the exclusion of much else. In my view they are incredibly lucky that they have had one of the most iconic and fluid practitioners of any sport in any era to aim at (and bring down, as any Fed fan has to accept) - the contrast between theirs and Fed's styles make great watching. The difference is that he would be a marvel to draw in the crowds in any era (we know that from 2003-2004 when neither Nadal nor Djoko had got going). They owe their popularity hugely to the contrast they provide. They have given that much to tennis, but in so doing they have not been called upon to look at the bigger picture, the converse is in fact the case.

The future of tennis is far, far, safer with the likes of Tiriac about than if it were put into the hands of Nadal and Djokovic. He was excelling at two sports and making money before they held a racquet, he has been part of the success story that is modern tennis from which they have gained so much and to which they have so much more to give. People should remember that before they go off on one about Tiriac.

How do you get a drummer off of your porch?







Pay him 10 bucks for the pizza.

Hmmm...that kind of reads abit like everyone should be sucking up to Tiriac and Federer and thinking themselves lucky they're both around. I suspect Nadal would have been a marvel to draw in the crowds in any era too...he's not just famous because of Federer, he also has to be able to PLAY a little bit too and has the personality that has engaged millions of people and drawn them into tennis. Especially kids...who are also the future of tennis.

In terms of the tour being safe in hands of Tiriac, well if you're into meglamanics bulldozing through tour changes without either full ATP or player input and testing then fair enough. And dont forget it wasnt just the top 2 who were against the changes - why just single them out? If you want tennis to become controlled by the likes of another F1 Ecclestone then fair enough...then perhaps ATP can stand for Association of Tiriac's Players?

There's no need to suck up to these guys, my whole point is that a bit of opposition is what keeps the water fresh, although I would say that they have both made very substantial contributions towards tennis.

Nor did I say that Tiriac should control tennis, just that he's a useful irritant against inherent conservatism, keeping an eye on what the punters want to see. wanting to make money is very healthy up to a point - in a genuinely competitive environment people don't fool around with money, they like to to give punters what they want. It's when people have too much power that you get into trouble - Tiriac is a long way away from Ecclestone and I'd never advocate a similar arrangement, and thankfully it can't happen whilst the ATP is in charge (which I think it should be).

Federer is lucky to have Nadal around - his legacy is indelibly linked to Nadal, that much is clear, they both add to one another's career stories - and of course I admit that Nadal can more than play a bit, anyone suggesting the contrary needs their head examining. But I would suggest that tennis without the Nadal counter-balance to Federer would be far more palatable to far more people than without the Federer counter-balance to Nadal. Perhaps I am betraying my taste, so be it, I still think I'm right!

You two are distracting me from coming up with more amaaazing drummer jokes with your thoughtful discussion...

I don't know much about Tiriac other than that he was Nastase's compatriot and he has an awesome walrus tache. When you say he's done a lot for tennis, what are you referring to?

Federer-Nadal tap into those great contrasting rivalries down the years...Sampras-Agassi, Borg-McEnroe. Ultimately people probably remember them as part of a rivalry almost more than them as standalone players.

I was just really acting as a foil to some of your points. I know you're not advocating the extremes, me neither, but guys like Tiriac will try to dominate if you give them scope to do so. The tour does need innovation...for the calendar for one thing so we get proper tennis "seasons", but I'm not in favour of chucking in a lightening quick event in the middle of a clay season...albeit a short enough one as it is! Innovation has to be controlled by being properly consulted and tested. That hasnt happend with the Madrid change and for many it leaves a sour taste in the mouth and hints at how Tiriac could act if was allowed to get even more free rein. We'd have model ballgirls at every event, luminous balls, play in the dark tennis, etc. Innovation is a good thing but we dont want tennis becoming a circus freak show either - and I'm not convinced Tiriac respects the traditions of tennis enough to avoid that happening that free rein.

lydian wrote:Hmmm...that kind of reads abit like everyone should be sucking up to Tiriac and Federer and thinking themselves lucky they're both around. I suspect Nadal would have been a marvel to draw in the crowds in any era too...he's not just famous because of Federer, he also has to be able to PLAY a little bit too and has the personality that has engaged millions of people and drawn them into tennis. Especially kids...who are also the future of tennis.

You mean the hair?

I agree that Tiriac's role should be influential but not powerful - nobody should have absolute power over any sport.

Tiriac is agreeing that the surface needs fixing, so I don't think he's necessarily advocating a lightening quick surface, although if his preference for players is the correct guage it's possible his default preference is a quicker rather than a slower surface. From 2009-2011 the winner at Madrid has won RG 2/3 times so in normal conditions it's not exactly ruining their preparation.

Time will tell - but the ATP have their eye on him now for sure. He in turn has introduced the innovation of blue clay which, if the playing qualities can be sorted out, may prove to be very successful. Plenty of people say that it helps them see the ball on a screen - what's not to like about that?

Posters can say what they like; as I have said elsewhere, whilst I think players have every right to criticize the surface, publicly threatening boycotts is beyond the pale.

The thing is: Tiriac is one of the important guys in tennis, one who has done a lot to promote the game over the past 40 years or so, a very successful coach,talent manger and business man afterwards. Looks like he is aware the game needs to be shaken up and personally I fully back his courageous agenda to shake things up a bit, from the currrent not exciting situation.

lol reckoner...where are you getting those drummer things from? You'll be posting a link to Bing Crosby's Little Drummer Boy next!

Yes barry, I think Tiriac does favour fast tennis (which I dont have a problem with per se, there are plenty of courts to speed up during the year across the ubiquitous hardcourt seasons)...given he was also Boris' manager as well as his piano comment towards Federer. Given that comment is a few years old it may also explain some of the animosity Nadal feels towards him...and why Nadal is bristling so publicly about the changes.

I'm not fussed about the colour of the courts, although the red/yellow combo hasnt exactly driven others to change things up...I think its an overreaction, or rather an excuse for innovation to make Madrid stand out, its also the colours of the main annual sponsor too. On the other hand I think red clay makes for a warmer viewing experience, I feel the Magic Box and blue courts a little sterile in Madrid, indeed perhaps a little soulless.

Innovation is fine and always needed...we need faster courts, that will give all the innovation, variety and excitement we need. But we need consistency too...seasons of tennis that reflect surface types, not a jumbled mix of fast-slow all year long.

Lets see what happens next year...and whether the drum is still banging the same beat or not.

just for you lydian : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADbJLo4x-tk

Anyone care to fill me in on what Tiriac has done for tennis?

lydian wrote:Given that comment is a few years old it may also explain some of the animosity Nadal feels towards him...and why Nadal is bristling so publicly about the changes.

Yeah - I've criticized Nadal and Djoko for their public threat, and I stand by that, but Tiriac's comment was not exactly complimentary of Nadal and more suited to a pundit than a tournament owner.

As I said elsewhere, I think Nadal is quite probably looking for a reason to drop his clay-season committment to 3 pre-RG tournaments and the run of MC/Barcelona/Rome has always worked well for him with a full committment to a final run in a 4th tournament being a 'bridge too far' most memorably in 2009 and to a lesser extent in 2007. Coming up with a reason not to go to Madrid makes sense for his schedule (it also has the altitude which no amount of wizardry can change) - that may be another reason why he was relaxed about letting go. Tiriac may find that his attempts to replace Hamburg with a 'go to' Clay TMS will have to wait for a generation of players which does not contain one or two guys at the top who can get to the final of every tournament they play.

reckoner wrote:just for you lydian : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADbJLo4x-tk

Anyone care to fill me in on what Tiriac has done for tennis?

One important thing he did was to play for the Romanian National Hockey team.......

Good points Barry. Next year would Nadal be starting to exempt from having to play a full calendar anyway...isnt it based on how many tour matches they have played? I think he'll ditch Madrid anyway...as next year the clay calendar will change again and Madrid might be the week after Barcelona...you always get 1-2 events in the clay season going back to back. Nadal doesnt need to prove himself at Masters anymore, surely with his achievements its got to be all about the Majors now?

haha reckoner...perfect! I like a bit of Bowie for sure...and that's got to be one of the oddest duets of all time? (lord knows how they got Bowie into a suit in 1977 as well)
Also, you could kind of imagine Crosby being Bowie's grandad...where's Jeremy Kyle for the DNA test!
(besides being the poster above this...lol)

I don't think the quote is that uncomplimentary towards Nadal:

“Nadal, in my opinion, invented new ballistics in the game of tennis,” said Ion Tiriac, the Romanian impresario and former player, who owns the Madrid Open. “Although I’m a big hunter and go hunt every year in Africa and all over and know something about ballistics, I cannot explain how that ball, even when it comes in the middle of the court and so low, Nadal can hit it with all the strength he has with his forehand and the ball still lands in the court.”

Tiriac thinks Nadal hits the ball “faster, not harder” than any other player. “On a tennis court, Federer plays the piano; Nadal plays drums,” Tiriac said. “But his hands on the drums are much faster than Federer’s on the piano.”

lydian wrote:haha reckoner...perfect! I like a bit of Bowie for sure...and that's got to be one of the oddest duets of all time? (lord knows how they got Bowie into a suit in 1977 as well)
Also, you could kind of imagine Crosby being Bowie's grandad...where's Jeremy Kyle for the DNA test!
(besides being the poster above this...lol)

Isn't it bizarre? Bowie was trying to appeal to a more mainstream audience at the time and apparently agreed to do it as his mum liked Bing - bless.

Good post reckoner...seeing that quote makes alot of difference.

Sometimes you know, I wish people would appreciate the uniqueness of Nadal's forehand...as I technical student of the game it is a marvel of timing and yes power...but the timing is amazing to generate 5000rpm. The way he uses stretch shortening cycles in the prep for the FH is unprecedented in the game. Tiriac clearly does recognise that at least although naively professes he doesnt know how Nadal does it (I think Tiriac does know really...he knows tennis well enough). If anyone plays tennis to a decent level, try holding your arm back as long as possible with a cocked wrist before then whipping the racquet forward to hit the ball...it takes prodigous timing to get the ball with that amount of ball to be landing anywhere near consistently and its no wonder he goes through phases of hitting it short because with that level of spin and type of technique its so hard to time it deep all the time - but what an effective shot it is. If you see it live in person on a practice court it a sight to behold as he hits it 20% harder there, and you can see the ball rear up off the court each time, I sometimes wonder why he doesnt hit the way he does in practice out on the match court.

reckoner wrote:I don't think the quote is that uncomplimentary towards Nadal:

Tiriac thinks Nadal hits the ball “faster, not harder” than any other player. “On a tennis court, Federer plays the piano; Nadal plays drums,” Tiriac said. “But his hands on the drums are much faster than Federer’s on the piano.”

I don't think its uncomplementary either. It's just: what would be like music played by drums only? A bit dull imo.

For me the analogy doesnt work that way. When I watch his game I dont see "boring" drums...he plays with more variety than most players on tour I'd say. But each to his own.

lydian wrote:...seeing that quote makes alot of difference.

No worries!

lydian wrote:For me the analogy doesnt work that way. When I watch his game I dont see "boring" drums...he plays with more variety than most players on tour I'd say. But each to his own.

I have to say it's not my cup of tea - I'm sure Nadal's forehand is interesting from a technical point of view but his style of play and various other attributes are not at all what I like in tennis - all discussed to death so I won't go there lol.

As you say it's just a question of taste!

Cheers reckoner.

You know if anything I would pin the "drums" label more on Djokovic than Nadal. I find Novak's game very effective (clearly) but also very dull...for me he plays a game that is essentially a series of cross-court and DTL drills. Just my opinion..but I think its also one of the reasons why both Federer and Nadal are more popular. I think they both use more variety than Djokovic, and by that I mean a different mix of shots, and different types of FH and BHs too. Also - we cant say Nadal-Federer are more popular due to the number of times played against each other as Novak has played both a similar number of times!

Reckoner's amplification of the quote makes it look very reasonable and measured, so it would seem that the quote alone is not a ground for Nadal bearing a grudge (if he does).

For me Nadal is like Sampras - no doubt what he does is technically unbelievable and v. difficult and worthy of appreciation by a connoisseur of tennis. I don't appreciate it enough to overcome what for me is the extreme boredom of watching him play, just as with Sampras.

lydian wrote:Good post reckoner...seeing that quote makes alot of difference.

Sometimes you know, I wish people would appreciate the uniqueness of Nadal's forehand...as I technical student of the game it is a marvel of timing and yes power...but the timing is amazing to generate 5000rpm. The way he uses stretch shortening cycles in the prep for the FH is unprecedented in the game. Tiriac clearly does recognise that at least although naively professes he doesnt know how Nadal does it (I think Tiriac does know really...he knows tennis well enough). If anyone plays tennis to a decent level, try holding your arm back as long as possible with a cocked wrist before then whipping the racquet forward to hit the ball...it takes prodigous timing to get the ball with that amount of ball to be landing anywhere near consistently and its no wonder he goes through phases of hitting it short because with that level of spin and type of technique its so hard to time it deep all the time - but what an effective shot it is. If you see it live in person on a practice court it a sight to behold as he hits it 20% harder there, and you can see the ball rear up off the court each time, I sometimes wonder why he doesnt hit the way he does in practice out on the match court.

As someone who has played at a pretty ordinary level (albeit with a lot of personal enjoyment) and with little in the way of in-depth technical knowledge, I was interested to read your analysis.

I think even in the most general terms it's so easy to forget just how very special players at Nadal's level are in terms of their ability to reproduce a given shot time after time and with such efficacy. And that goes for so many elite players in all types of ball sports. I always remember standing just a few feet from one of the US golfers in the Ryder Cup team and watching him strike the ball from a difficult lie with what seemed like stunning power and accuracy - and thinking to myself "ah, that's what it looks like when you see someone at the summit of the game...... " It was many years ago, and the first time I had ever been to a top level golf event.

Back to tennis and on your point re wondering "why he doesn't hit the way he does in practice out on the match court" : I don't know the definitive answer myself, but could it be either because a) it would increase (unacceptably) the margin for error, and/or b) he knows that on the practice court he can take a break for five mins or so whenever it suits whereas on the match court he needs to pace himself for a possible five (or even six !!) hour slugfest .....

Most top practitioners in dozens of sports can and regularly do pull out 110% in practice. When they know that they are capable of that they can have complete confidence in their ability to pull out the 80-90% consistently which is what is needed to win a match and achieve the manageable balance between margin for error and excellence which does not screw with their minds. They need to know that the go-to shot is there.

barrystar wrote:Most top practitioners in dozens of sports can and regularly do pull out 110% in practice.

#rant

aaaargh I hate that phrase with a passion. 100% is a the maximum effort one can expend it is impossible to exceed it

#endofrant

barrystar wrote:... Tiriac wants to make tennis something that fans like to watch, at the tournament and on screens. His desire to make money out of it is derided, but if he's making money out of it the fans are enjoying the product and more players will be wanting to play. Take a deep breath and read this Tiriac has no interest in killing the goose that lays the golden egg. As Tiriac points out, pretty much all the innovations in recent years have been achieved in the teeth of objections from players - why is that? ...

Hi Barrystar, a big thank you from me for helping to address the balance, for an uncommitted tennis "fan" such as myself, all I have read in the media are that Rafa and Djoko are angry and that the blue clay has safety issues. Now I am beginning to see the perspective from the other side - from the side of Tiriac. A very helpful set of comments from you

On a separate note:
Raonic: up and coming rock guitarist.
Djokovic: Electric keyboard.
Ferrer: Spanish guitar.
Murray: the spoons.
Gasquet: the banjo.
Berdych: Rock guitarist with a broken string.

reckoner wrote:

barrystar wrote:Most top practitioners in dozens of sports can and regularly do pull out 110% in practice.

#rant

aaaargh I hate that phrase with a passion. 100% is a the maximum effort one can expend it is impossible to exceed it

#endofrant

Yeah, Poopie I know, but I think you know what I mean.

reckoner wrote:

barrystar wrote:Most top practitioners in dozens of sports can and regularly do pull out 110% in practice.

#rant

aaaargh I hate that phrase with a passion. 100% is a the maximum effort one can expend it is impossible to exceed it

#endofrant

It depends what they mean by 100% though, e.g. a 100% of 50 doughnuts is 50 doughnuts, whereas if I go into the shop and say give me 110% they should give me 55 doughnuts. However, I understand your point, and it suggests that normally the players don't give 100%. Alternately 110% might mean they take drugs - with the drugs providing the extra 10%. Not sure really but I find it "interesting", when not used too often.

When I use 110% I think of it being a step too far, almost self-destructive, so unsustainable. A good example is climbing Everest, if you get summit fever and press on for the top when its dangerous not to turn back because of weather or dark or whatever you may die on the descent - you gave it 110% got to the top, but ulimately screwed up.

The guy who gives it 100% knows he can't and shouldn't do any more and turns back - perhaps later than the (arguably more sensible) guy who gives it 80%!

NoreStaat - although I was already clear in my own mind that Rafa and Nole had over-reacted in the wake of their respective Madrid exits, I too was pleased to see barrystar's very calm and rational analysis of things from a wider, more balanced perspective.

I'm very conscious that any genuine and well-founded concerns about court safety would have to be addressed and it's clear that Tiriac is 100% ready to co-operate on this aspect

However the comments along the lines of the court doesn't allow me to play my particular brand of tennis simply doesn't wash with me and is in many ways reminiscent of the refusal of so many of the Spanish and South American contingent who would never come to Wimbledon back in the 70's and 80's because it didn't suit their game. Happily things have moved on since then and there is no better example (ironically) than Rafa himself in terms of proof that you can adapt when you're willing to put your mind to it rather than creating inner demons before you step on to court.

As for the everything must be geared to ideal RG preparation surface-wise philosophy ..... well once again I find myself thinking back to the days when Borg could win all his RG titles and then hop across to SW19 and do the same here - but with virtually no time to prepare for the surface change, and without actually playing a grass event in between clay and grass

barrystar wrote:When I use 110% I think of it being a step too far, almost self-destructive, so unsustainable. A good example is climbing Everest, if you get summit fever and press on for the top when its dangerous not to turn back because of weather or dark or whatever you may die on the descent - you gave it 110% got to the top, but ulimately screwed up.

The guy who gives it 100% knows he can't and shouldn't do any more and turns back - perhaps later than the (arguably more sensible) guy who gives it 80%!

I'm afraid not... as any maths teacher will tell you the guy that got to the top (with or without Nore's 50 drugged doughnuts) and died is the one who gave it 100%.

Another one that bugs me is "he played unbelievable" aaaargh no he didn't he played unbelievably well!

lags72 wrote:NoreStaat - although I was already clear in my own mind that Rafa and Nole had over-reacted in the wake of their respective Madrid exits, I too was pleased to see barrystar's very calm and rational analysis of things from a wider, more balanced perspective.

I'm very conscious that any genuine and well-founded concerns about court safety would have to be addressed and it's clear that Tiriac is 100% ready to co-operate on this aspect

However the comments along the lines of the court doesn't allow me to play my particular brand of tennis simply doesn't wash with me and is in many ways reminiscent of the refusal of so many of the Spanish and South American contingent who would never come to Wimbledon back in the 70's and 80's because it didn't suit their game. Happily things have moved on since then and there is no better example (ironically) than Rafa himself in terms of proof that you can adapt when you're willing to put your mind to it rather than creating inner demons before you step on to court.

As for the everything must be geared to ideal RG preparation surface-wise philosophy ..... well once again I find myself thinking back to the days when Borg could win all his RG titles and then hop across to SW19 and do the same here - but with virtually no time to prepare for the surface change, and without actually playing a grass event in between clay and grass

quite agree with this and those saying Djakal's post Madrid behaviour has been self serving and graceless.

You are right of course - 110% is a bit of an abomination and I should steer clear.

One thing I never do is to confuse an adjective with an adverb - I write too good for that.

barrystar wrote:You are right of course - 110% is a bit of an abomination and I should steer clear.

One thing I never do is to confuse an adjective with an adverb - I write too good for that.

Well I was surprised as usually your writing is unbelievable!

reckoner wrote:

barrystar wrote:You are right of course - 110% is a bit of an abomination and I should steer clear.

One thing I never do is to confuse an adjective with an adverb - I write too good for that.

Well I was surprised as usually your writing is unbelievable!

You missed a trick there, should have been "you write unbelievable", and unfortunately you used an adjective Tut tut.