Goffin...and Brits

Disappointed he lost in the 1st round of Newport against Benjamin Becker.
I had expected more from him after a decent showing at Wimbledon.

It makes me wonder if this young man has 'it' or whether RG/SW19 were one-offs, or rather he can only play well at slams when he has goliaths to hunt down but cant cut it against his peers. I say this because outside of his FO and SW19 runs its now 4 straight losses in R1. A shame.

So...just where are the consistent breakthroughs from the 21s and under coming from? Am I being harsh on Goffin...does it take longer for todays talent to develop and break through due to the game being physically tougher...Goffin does look like Mr Muscle at times.

And if no-one is breaking through at the top it looks like we're going into a dry period outside the top 4.
Remember Tsonga and Berdych are also starting to put on the years. Guess Delpo is youngish but his body is feeling it.
The oft fancied Raonic hasnt made the inroads we expected so far either....getting beaten by routine journeymen...not what happened to the top 3 on their ascent really. Who do you think will be the next 20/21/22 yr old to break through to the top 5, even 4? Raonic, Dolgo...?
Doesnt look like cheeky-faced Goffin for now...a pity as I really like his game.

Whatever...maybe Murray has a great chance of winning slams after all if Federer wanes, and Djokovic and Nadal plateau.
Which begs the other question...what is there in line for UK after Murray...???

I see a lot of Dolgopolov in Goffin, i.e. quite a bit of 'talent' (vague i know) with good variety, not overwhelming power but good groundstrokes nevertheless. However, i think like Dolgo (who will be 24 this year so not THAT young), i think there are some key deficiencies in his game including a poor serve, general inconsistency and a lack of strength on the mental side. I was impressed with how he pushed Fed at Wimby & his run in the French but obviously we need to see more of this over the next 12 months in more tournies to know that it wasn't just a momentary purple patch.

At this moment in time, the only under 22 guy that I see breaking the top 15 (and staying) in the near future is Raonic. And even with him I'm not sure he has the skills to be more than a 1 slam man. I've like Tsonga's resurgence and would similarly like to see Delpo return to his '09 form.

Nice observations ALPanorak...I agree that Goffin needs to strengthen up a few areas of his game. Mentally I think he's pretty strong against the big guys (which bodes well) but against grinder players I think he struggles for some reason. Maybe its inexperience at this stage...and he's only just burst onto the main scene really so perhaps its still very early days to judge.

Yes Raonic is a conundrum. He has THE serve, albeit with not as much variety as say Federer, but his movement is suspect and he plays with a lack of variety in general and I think will start to get sussed out more...which is maybe what is already happening. That said, agree he should be staple Top 20.

And then Britain...oh dear. What's behind Murray (besides Sue Barker)?

For the size of our population we still have woeful underachievement...if we look at top 300 players...

US has 22 players
Spain has 26 players(!)
France has 32 players(!)
Italy has 14 players
Germany has 22 players
small Switzelrand has 5 players
small Holland has 6 players
small Serbia has 6 players

UK of 60 million people? 4 players!!!!!
Just one player in the top 150!

What's going on........??????????

Bernard Tomic? Aside from a poor showing at Wimby this year (being beaten by the man in question actually) he's been making steady inroads towards the top of the game.

I was expecting Dimitrov to do well at RG and W. Lost to Baggy at W due to injury . I can perhaps understand the RG loss to Gasquet more easily.

Lydian... Re Goffin and Muscles Rosewall, the resemblance is uncanny. One of the matches @W, Goffin's shorts were literally falling off.

lydian wrote:Nice observations ALPanorak...I agree that Goffin needs to strengthen up a few areas of his game. Mentally I think he's pretty strong against the big guys (which bodes well) but against grinder players I think he struggles for some reason. Maybe its inexperience at this stage...and he's only just burst onto the main scene really so perhaps its still very early days to judge.

Yes Raonic is a conundrum. He has THE serve, albeit with not as much variety as say Federer, but his movement is suspect and he plays with a lack of variety in general and I think will start to get sussed out more...which is maybe what is already happening. That said, agree he should be staple Top 20.

And then Britain...oh dear. What's behind Murray (besides Sue Barker)?

For the size of our population we still have woeful underachievement...if we look at top 300 players...

US has 22 players
Spain has 26 players(!)
France has 32 players(!)
Italy has 14 players
Germany has 22 players
small Switzelrand has 5 players
small Holland has 6 players
small Serbia has 6 players

UK of 60 million people? 4 players!!!!!
Just one player in the top 150!

What's going on........??????????

http://www.lta.org.uk/

Interesting about comparing by population. Technically one might even say the small country Scotland has a top player and England, Wales, N.I. have zero...

It's quite simple. Either we accept that the current young crop are not good enough and that's the reason why none are in the Top 20 or we accept that the average age players for their peak performances is getting older

I think it's 60% of the latter and 40% of the former

I see the current Top 5, not getting touched - unless there are injuries or retirements for around 4 years

Del Potro, will continue to not get near - simply because he hardly beats these 5 or Ferrer

That doesn't rule him out for another Slam

lydian wrote:
Which begs the other question...what is there in line for UK after Murray...???

Not a fat lot

I know that we do have a group of very talented 16-18 year olds and I do hope that a couple of them can make the jump from successful junior to top 100 men’s, but based on years of experience there does seem to be only the 3 methods of getting a British player into the high echelons of the game:
1, Make sure he learnt to play the game in Canada
2, Make sure he was born to an affluent Home Counties family with a grass court in the backyard
3, Make sure his mother is a tennis coach and prepared to move him out of the country and, more importantly, away from any LTA interference.

I reckon we’ve got maybe another 4 to 5 years (at the most) of AM generating interest in the British public and media owing to him getting to the later rounds of (mainly) Wimbledon. After that, I predict that interest will wane very quickly as Wimbledon will be the only main tournament that British men players play in, and that via WC’s as they will not be ranked high enough to gain entry without them. Those given WC’s will be knocked out by the end of the first Wednesday. People, and the media, have got used to British players still being involved at the business end of Wimbledon indeed with the ‘success’ of first Rusedski and Henman then Murray, the media needs this to take any interest in it. I read somewhere that 16 million people watched Murray’s semi against Tsonga; how many would watch, say in 8 years’ time, a (for instance) Aussie versus an East European?

Must surely be time for another 10 year plan?

bradman99.94 wrote:I reckon we’ve got maybe another 4 to 5 years (at the most) of AM generating interest in the British public and media owing to him getting to the later rounds of (mainly) Wimbledon

No reason why Murray can't last until he's 31/32 at the Top, given the current lack of great youngsters. He doesn't have a game that relies on power - often the first thing to go. He's also got a far better chance at the US Open and Australia

For me, he has 18 more opportunities

Cheers reckoner, I use that link all the time
(for entering my son into tennis tournaments)

Its funny when you look on there...you're average good club singles player might have a rating of 10.2/9.2/8.2...Murray is at the top with 1.1 and about 1.5million LTA points...dont know how they work it out. If you win a local tournament you might get 250 points!

To be fair they have completely restructured junior tennis coaching, ratings and tournaments so we might see better fruit in 5-10 years but there will still be a vacuum until that time. One problem is lack of indoor facilities - parents have to drive their kids for miles to get decent training (I know...), the other is lack of tennis being pushed in schools...I was hoping a Murray win last Sunday might change that. But we're certainly punching beneath our weight at national level.

lol LF...Goffin is so tiny isnt he. Its amazing he can hit the ball as hard as he does which does suggest prodigious talent. But he will have to flesh out. On the downside he's a little short as well to do well these days...just 5'11' (just...). Although Ferrer would argue height isnt important. Karlovic would argue he cant see his feet up against the line...

Good points banbrotam...I think we are seeing an age shift in tennis...the conditioning needed to compete at the top does take many years to gain...we have seen that with Murray. Raw talent isnt enough now.

Not sure about Tomic...has the talent, not sure he has the head. Is father looks a right one though...

I say Murray has 12 more opportunities.

Well okay, perhaps Murray can still perform at the top level until he's 31/2 (hope so) but what's following him?.......That gives the current crop of youngster 6 years or so to make the grade, or the current 11/12 year olds time to start to break into the senior game. The problem is that they'll still be coming through the same LTA process that hasn't produced any in the last 20 years

Great post Bradman. Another issue for the UK in its tennis advancement is something the USTA have just noticed they're going to now focus on..and what separates other countries that have strong representation in the top 300.

CLAY COURTS!!

In their wisdom. the USTA have now recognised that learning tennis on clay courts is the best to develop a young players game due to the solidity of strokes needed, tactical acument and fitness. So they're investing massively in clay court installation...and not that Houston green clay but proper European red clay.

Think about it. What do France, Italy, Spain and Germany have in common besides great tennis success? Clay courts! Federer was brought up on them...Nadal of course....Djokovic...Ferrer...even Murray moved to Barcelona at 14 to train on them. They produce great players.

How many proper red clay courts do we have in the UK? A handful. This has to be addressed...and it actually suits our climate better as they're more playable than HC. But one of our problems has been that kids come through our LTA system having become adept on faster courts because they learnt alot of their tennis indoors...thats why we have a bunch of players who often do well at Queens or Wimb but nowhere else. This might be ok 10 years when courts were quicker on ATP but not now surfaces are slower than before.

We need a USTA-type radical overhaul and investment into indoor coverings...i.e. more covered clay courts. Its by no means a coincidence that France and Spain have by far and away the most players in the top 300...they moved their coaching and honing onto clay years ago and are now reaping the benefits.

Not many really is it reckoner and I agree...was thinking along similar lines the other day driving into work. I think even lesschances though.

If we discount winning a clay slam, he's got 1 more chance in 2012, 3 more in 2013, 3 more in 2014...and then maybe AO15...by FO15 if he's still not won a slam surely the mental 'defeat' of not having snagged one will count more against him than age? By 2015 he'd be getting on for 28 which is getting immensely old for a first time slam winner in Open Era (how many have won after 26/27/28 yr old for 1st time?). So I think he has 8....just 8 chances to win one. That;s not many when you focus on chances, not years ahead.

Yeah lydian, I was being generous with 12. 8 is probably closer to the mark.

The top guys don't appear to be going anywhere for the next 2 years so it's likely to be pretty slim pickings!

Looking that way...you feel he needs one by next USO really...or else the non-slam baggage just mounts. You can imagine it must be starting to get to him already...and he knows he still has 3 guys ahead of him that are immensely hard to beat.

Sorry, but I don't see why it's 'now or never'. Murray's still at the younger end of players in the Top 100 and so the significant of being 28 without having one, will probably be the new 25

One minute everyone says that the peak has increased, most saying it's 27/28 as opposed to 24/25 (like it was in the 90's).

Next minute, we're downplaying the chances of a 25-year old, who is actually still improving and is miles clear of the youngsters who threaten him

There is no reason, other than injury why Murray won't be a Slam contender at 31. Henman had his best year in late 2003 to late 2004, when he was 29/30

So it's 18 chances for me. It will be irrelevant, how many times he's tried before - will he still be one of the best in six years. I think so

lydian wrote:Looking that way...you feel he needs one by next USO really...or else the non-slam baggage just mounts. You can imagine it must be starting to get to him already...and he

Don't see it. You see I think Murray quite rightly appreciates the era he's in and see's a good future if he keeps striving for the prize. He's never given the impression that the pressure of not having a Slam gets to him and in this final played better than he did against Fed at Dubai

I think people worry about the lack of a Slam more than he does. Can't see him ever saying "will I ever win one"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Grand_Slam_men's_singles_champions_by_age_at_first_win

By my reckoning there's 4 players out of 47 Slam winners who won their first slam after 28 in the Open era, so it is possible. Low probablity though.

lydian wrote:lol LF...Goffin is so tiny isnt he. Its amazing he can hit the ball as hard as he does which does suggest prodigious talent. But he will have to flesh out. On the downside he's a little short as well to do well these days...just 5'11' (just...). Although Ferrer would argue height isnt important. Karlovic would argue he cant see his feet up against the line...

Agassi, Connors, McEnroe, et al. Very talented and wonderful line of players.

Maybe banbrotam...but the pressure will tell over time if lets say he goes 4 more slams without winning one. He'll start to feel like the best player never to win one (which he probably would be).

If you look at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Grand_Slam_men's_singles_champions_by_age_at_first_win

Out of 47 different slam winners in Open Era, only 12 were older than Andy when they first won a slam.

If we look to the modern era...which I always say is 1980 onwards...then that drops to 6...Korda, Goran, Gomez, Muster, Costa and Johannson...and all these guys 'only' won 1 slam which indicates that its tough for those who start later versus the big multislammers who start winning much younger.

Ok...they're just stats. But the longer he leaves it the more history states he's less likely to do it, and the less likely he is to win many at all...especially with the opposition as it now. I'm not knocking the guy just stating he'll be in relatively rare company to win a slam over 25 first time.
I hope he does it, truly, but he needs to get a move on...because surely there is a reason why only 6 guys since 1980 have won the first slam over age of 25. I still believe the pressure on those expected to win one starts to tell the longer time goes.

No way reckoner!!!!!!!!! You posted the same thing...lol (I had my response post up for a while before coming back to it and posting...didnt see yours!)

lydian wrote:No way reckoner!!!!!!!!! You posted the same thing...lol (I had my response post up for a while before coming back to it and posting...didnt see yours!)

Great minds, lydian, great minds...

hehe...

lydian wrote:Disappointed he lost in the 1st round of Newport against Benjamin Becker.
I had expected more from him after a decent showing at Wimbledon.

Oh no call the police, he lost in a 250!!!

Which begs the other question...what is there in line for UK after Murray...???

Oliver Golding, George Morgan, Dan Evans, Kyle Edmund.

What's next for the UK? God knows!

In the past 15 years we've had Henman, Rusedski and Murray... And the biggest worry is that Henman was home taught, Rusedski is Canadian and Andy became the player that is because of his training in Spain.

So essentially, the LTA hasn't produced a top twenty player since.... Well, I don't know! Who was the last LTA top twenty ranked man?!

Anyone know??? How bad must the system be to have a record like that in spite of all the millions thrown at it?!

lydian wrote:Maybe banbrotam...but the pressure will tell over time if lets say he goes 4 more slams without winning one. He'll start to feel like the best player never to win one (which he probably would be).

If you look at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Grand_Slam_men's_singles_champions_by_age_at_first_win

Out of 47 different slam winners in Open Era, only 12 were older than Andy when they first won a slam.

If we look to the modern era...which I always say is 1980 onwards...then that drops to 6...Korda, Goran, Gomez, Muster, Costa and Johannson...and all these guys 'only' won 1 slam which indicates that its tough for those who start later versus the big multislammers who start winning much younger.

Ok...they're just stats. But the longer he leaves it the more history states he's less likely to do it, and the less likely he is to win many at all...especially with the opposition as it now. I'm not knocking the guy just stating he'll be in relatively rare company to win a slam over 25 first time.
I hope he does it, truly, but he needs to get a move on...because surely there is a reason why only 6 guys since 1980 have won the first slam over age of 25. I still believe the pressure on those expected to win one starts to tell the longer time goes.

Im not sure how relevant those stats are in today's game to be honest lydian. In the past multi slam winners were top 10 players while still in their teens. How many teens do we have even near the top ten now? Isn't there only 2 in the top 100 or something ridiculous.

That could be that the next generation simply don't look very good, or that tennis is changing and that the peak years for a player is no longer around 22 - 25 roughly, but is now a bit later. Certainly the rankings have a lot of 27-31 year olds near the top, which is very unusual.

Maybe the years of youngish players ruling the game are over.

Sadly outside Goffin I don't see anybody and aren't we tired of waiting for some youngster to come and do a mind blowing performance.

Whats tiresome is youngsters not even playing one hell of a match to beat a Top3, something like Fed doing against Sampras, or Nadal doing against Federer.

Im interested to see how Luke Saville does, who apart from his final defeat at the Wimbledon Juniors has been pretty dominant in the juniors. Fact is Roger and Rafa have been so consistent in the last 7/8 years that everyone underneath them has improved their levels big time so the new gen have to wait.

It would be great to see one of the young guns coming up to upset some of the top guys once in a while.

Was it five 30 year olds through to round 4? Tremendous, and a little bit worrying at the same time!

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Im interested to see how Luke Saville does, who apart from his final defeat at the Wimbledon Juniors has been pretty dominant in the juniors. Fact is Roger and Rafa have been so consistent in the last 7/8 years that everyone underneath them has improved their levels big time so the new gen have to wait.

Jimmy is doing well? I watched the Wimbledon Juniors Final with him in it last year; thought he played alright. Still, a good junior player doesn't mean a good senior player. These Aussie juniors (and Aussie's in general) are alright on grass; I thought that would be their worst surface.

Laura Robson into the last 8 of Italiacom open after defeating Roberta Vinci the 2nd seed 6-3 7-5