Stefan Edberg probably played the most beautiful serve-volley tennis in the history of the game. Just look how he digs up those returns and place himself in perfect position by the net to strike a deadly shot on the opponents side. Pure poetry! Maybe Edberg was the last and maybe best ambassadeur for seve-volley tennis. Todays surfaces and equipment doesn't allow this kind of tennis anymore.
@MrJimpa1969 its not all about just surfaces and equipment believe me...lets be fair nobody just do not want to play good volleyes nowadays, because if they'd no equipment, neither surface wouldn't stop them...and trainers feel no need to train volleyers, since its not required to win in dramatci matches as they "think"...
@MrJimpa1969 believe me i know what i'm talking about, i'm amateur tennis player myself and i have very annoying trainer who always keep telling me serve&volley is ineffective you should change your style if you want to start winning, but i reply with "f*ck off< i like serve&volley and i'm the one to prove you you're wrong"...
Edberg in 90~92 would make one of the top players even today. He was a bit streaky but almost invincible when his game was on. Effect of racket technology and strings are greatly exaggerated. A lot of top players customized their rackets anyways. Federer's stick is basically same as the original pro-staff. Surface does hurt volleyers but once again its effect is exaggerated. Look at Talyor dent top 50~ish player before getting injured. He makes a come back and almost made to ATP rank of 70 ish.
Sports is mainly a mental game anyway, the top players are there for a reason. I agree Stefan Edberg might change his game a little, but he'd be at the top
@alin1975 It's basically the same. Andre Agassi competed awesome against Roger Federer . Andre Agassi also competed against Stefan Edberg awesomely. It's just the different rackets. Players adapt
Now... Agassi had a modern game, making the transition to new racquets and slower surfaces easy if not welcomed. Even Pete had excellent ground strokes and a more power based game and he would probably need to adapt (just as Federer’s game has changed since he started).
So, to adapt, Edberg would have to reinvent his entire game from scratch. Thats a very tall order, particularly from a player with his forehand.
Imo, from that era, the one who could compete today would be Lendl.
@alin1975 Thanks for you opinion, but I don't agree with it. Stefan could adapt. He beat the power players when he was playing, and if he were playing now, he'd have the newer rackets to hit even harder and the new training techniques, so I think he could adapt.
But if you disagree, ok.
Thanks.
It just takes one serve and volleyer to prove they can compete, than a trend will start. But there's no S and V Talented player now.
So if you were to raise Edberg as a child today and teach him new tennis then it could work- he was very talented.
But to adapt Edberg's game to today's conditions once he already was the Edberg we know- never. Edberg's game would have to change completely (groundstrokes, tactics, the awful forehand, etc).
In his own time he could not match Lendl (with Lendl using 80s equipment). And with the new stuff baseliners get even better and volleyers get put at a disadvantage...
And just so I dont come across as having something against him, Stefan is without a doubt my favourite player of all time. I watched him since I was 9 years old or so.
I can argue for my position thats the difference. I backed it up with plenty real facts and expert opinions (including Edberg, perhaps he is just a follower?). I tried to show you what has changed that makes your opinion wishful thinking.
So please at least have the courtesy to not put our positions on the same level. It is an insult to discuss something with someone who ignores every point you make only to dismiss the conclusion as just an opinion. Its also a total waste of time.
@alin1975 And I have expressed my opinion too. I respect your views, but don't agree. But again you're entitled to your opinion. I do think a Serve and Volleyer can succeed. I don't think they can totally rely on a Serve and Volley style all together, but they have to rely on both a Serve and Volley and Baseline game.
Thanks.
And for a Serve and Volleyer to succeed, they have to be an incredible athlete
@alin1975 And one more thinkg, who is to say in the future they'll speed up the game or slow down the game even more? Tennis keeps changing, so who knows what changes they'll make in Tennis promoting or demoting the Serve and Volley game even more?
Look, what I said was very simple. Edberg could not succeed in today's game. My point (which I backed up adequately) was that there are too many factors against the s&v player, and that Edberg had too many weaknesses in his baseline game.
Your original statement was something like everything is still the same and Edberg could make it today (using Agassi as an example). Thats what I disputed- using quite a lot of facts.
I never made any claims whatsoever about the future of tennis.
@alin1975 And again, I think Stefan Edberg could succeed. I think in ways he would have to change some of his game, but he could succeed. As did Pete Sampras who was a serve a volleyer also.
And again, as I said before, I do think in the future Tennis will continue to change. Hopefully they'll realize that Wimbledon has to go back to the Traditional Grass and stop trying to make it like a slow surface. Hopefully that will happen.
@alin1975 Look, I respect your views, you have some valid points. Respect to U But I feel the way I do and believe he could succeed. To each his or her own. I believe in following your own path. Just because someone says that's the way it is, doesn't mean that's the way it is. It take someone to break out of the mold to prove it can be done. Right now, there's no pure S and V Tennis player who has that kind of skill. But who knows in the future. If you believe, you can achieve
For me this is not about belief and feeling. For me its about logic and reason. I assess the situation based on the facts and draw the best possible conclusion.
The "mold" is there for a reason (and again, Pete was very different from Edberg). As for "if you believe you can achieve"... come on. In sports today you also need the right genetics, training, and strategy. Without any one of these, you will fail.
But ok, if this is a question of faith for you, lets leave it at that.
@alin1975 just caught me attention your debate....I get your point but we have to look at these plyers at their time..you know I believe neither Sampras or Edberg could be number 1-2 today..but in their prime they were top guys.You know technics changed so much..rackets are much faster hitting,much lighter to hold and etc....wimbledon grass is much slower for example so the game changed...-of course you are right by the way.
I think I said a bunch of the stuff you wrote in the debate below (if memory serves).
And, let me add, I so miss that era of tennis... Edberg will always be my fav player of all time just because of the way his game looked when it was "on" :)
@locyka19 Just a month or so ago, I witnessed Edberg defeating Marat Safin in a tournament of the Legends series. Yes, it is not the ATP tour, but it is a match and it shows that the difference is not as big as you might think... ;)
Theres a general consensus that serve and volley has been made disadvantageous due to the changes. Edberg said so himself in interviews, so has McEnroe. Thats why volleyers slowly vanished.
The new raquets allow for much harder returns=lower reaction time at the net. And the slower surfaces mean that volleys can be caught easier. There are simply too many advantages for staying back and hitting hard and too many disadvantages for moving forward.
Moral of the story: Lots of Lobs = Lots of Fun
TheSparkleBrigade 2 months ago
Stefan Edberg probably played the most beautiful serve-volley tennis in the history of the game. Just look how he digs up those returns and place himself in perfect position by the net to strike a deadly shot on the opponents side. Pure poetry! Maybe Edberg was the last and maybe best ambassadeur for seve-volley tennis. Todays surfaces and equipment doesn't allow this kind of tennis anymore.
MrJimpa1969 5 months ago
@MrJimpa1969 its not all about just surfaces and equipment believe me...lets be fair nobody just do not want to play good volleyes nowadays, because if they'd no equipment, neither surface wouldn't stop them...and trainers feel no need to train volleyers, since its not required to win in dramatci matches as they "think"...
Summon256 4 months ago
@MrJimpa1969 believe me i know what i'm talking about, i'm amateur tennis player myself and i have very annoying trainer who always keep telling me serve&volley is ineffective you should change your style if you want to start winning, but i reply with "f*ck off< i like serve&volley and i'm the one to prove you you're wrong"...
Summon256 4 months ago
Edberg in 90~92 would make one of the top players even today. He was a bit streaky but almost invincible when his game was on. Effect of racket technology and strings are greatly exaggerated. A lot of top players customized their rackets anyways. Federer's stick is basically same as the original pro-staff. Surface does hurt volleyers but once again its effect is exaggerated. Look at Talyor dent top 50~ish player before getting injured. He makes a come back and almost made to ATP rank of 70 ish.
nocode61 10 months ago
@alin1975 We both agree to disagree.
I still think Stefan would be up there in the top 10. The top players in any generation are there for a reason.
Anyway, if you don't agree, that's ok. Respect to you
Peace
Thanks for you views Respect to you
yasudab1 1 year ago
Sports is mainly a mental game anyway, the top players are there for a reason. I agree Stefan Edberg might change his game a little, but he'd be at the top
yasudab1 1 year ago
This is tennis the likes of which you will simply not see today.
How I love this compared to today's powerplay.
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 It's basically the same. Andre Agassi competed awesome against Roger Federer . Andre Agassi also competed against Stefan Edberg awesomely. It's just the different rackets. Players adapt
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1
Well, the playing style is totally different. Its all baseliners- even Federer. Basically my point was that they bore me to tears :)
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 I honestly believe Stefan Edberg could compete against Roger Federer and Vice Versa
Thanks
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1
Now... Agassi had a modern game, making the transition to new racquets and slower surfaces easy if not welcomed. Even Pete had excellent ground strokes and a more power based game and he would probably need to adapt (just as Federer’s game has changed since he started).
So, to adapt, Edberg would have to reinvent his entire game from scratch. Thats a very tall order, particularly from a player with his forehand.
Imo, from that era, the one who could compete today would be Lendl.
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 Thanks for you opinion, but I don't agree with it. Stefan could adapt. He beat the power players when he was playing, and if he were playing now, he'd have the newer rackets to hit even harder and the new training techniques, so I think he could adapt.
But if you disagree, ok.
Thanks.
It just takes one serve and volleyer to prove they can compete, than a trend will start. But there's no S and V Talented player now.
Anyway
Thanks
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1 RF Stefan Edberg could adapt at any era. The top players always tend to rise to the top
Thanks.
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1
So if you were to raise Edberg as a child today and teach him new tennis then it could work- he was very talented.
But to adapt Edberg's game to today's conditions once he already was the Edberg we know- never. Edberg's game would have to change completely (groundstrokes, tactics, the awful forehand, etc).
In his own time he could not match Lendl (with Lendl using 80s equipment). And with the new stuff baseliners get even better and volleyers get put at a disadvantage...
alin1975 1 year ago
@yasudab1
And just so I dont come across as having something against him, Stefan is without a doubt my favourite player of all time. I watched him since I was 9 years old or so.
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 That's your opinion. But again, until someone can prove a Serve and Volleyer can win, that will be what everyone thinks.
Kind of like a follower mentality. Someone has to change that by being successful, than changes can be made.
That's your opinion, but I don't agree with it.
Anyway, peace
And a S and V Player has to be hugely athletic, which is what is going to take. This will increase the athletics in Tennis.
Although I think Stefan Edberg could do it
Thanks
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1
I can argue for my position thats the difference. I backed it up with plenty real facts and expert opinions (including Edberg, perhaps he is just a follower?). I tried to show you what has changed that makes your opinion wishful thinking.
So please at least have the courtesy to not put our positions on the same level. It is an insult to discuss something with someone who ignores every point you make only to dismiss the conclusion as just an opinion. Its also a total waste of time.
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 And I have expressed my opinion too. I respect your views, but don't agree. But again you're entitled to your opinion. I do think a Serve and Volleyer can succeed. I don't think they can totally rely on a Serve and Volley style all together, but they have to rely on both a Serve and Volley and Baseline game.
Thanks.
And for a Serve and Volleyer to succeed, they have to be an incredible athlete
yasudab1 1 year ago
@alin1975 And one more thinkg, who is to say in the future they'll speed up the game or slow down the game even more? Tennis keeps changing, so who knows what changes they'll make in Tennis promoting or demoting the Serve and Volley game even more?
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1
Look, what I said was very simple. Edberg could not succeed in today's game. My point (which I backed up adequately) was that there are too many factors against the s&v player, and that Edberg had too many weaknesses in his baseline game.
Your original statement was something like everything is still the same and Edberg could make it today (using Agassi as an example). Thats what I disputed- using quite a lot of facts.
I never made any claims whatsoever about the future of tennis.
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 And again, I think Stefan Edberg could succeed. I think in ways he would have to change some of his game, but he could succeed. As did Pete Sampras who was a serve a volleyer also.
And again, as I said before, I do think in the future Tennis will continue to change. Hopefully they'll realize that Wimbledon has to go back to the Traditional Grass and stop trying to make it like a slow surface. Hopefully that will happen.
Thanks.
Peace and love to you.
Love to U L
yasudab1 1 year ago
@alin1975 Look, I respect your views, you have some valid points. Respect to U But I feel the way I do and believe he could succeed. To each his or her own. I believe in following your own path. Just because someone says that's the way it is, doesn't mean that's the way it is. It take someone to break out of the mold to prove it can be done. Right now, there's no pure S and V Tennis player who has that kind of skill. But who knows in the future. If you believe, you can achieve
Thnx
yasudab1 1 year ago
@alin1975 Maybe you're right. And respect to you if you are.
These are my opinions
I do believe what I believe
yasudab1 1 year ago
@yasudab1
For me this is not about belief and feeling. For me its about logic and reason. I assess the situation based on the facts and draw the best possible conclusion.
The "mold" is there for a reason (and again, Pete was very different from Edberg). As for "if you believe you can achieve"... come on. In sports today you also need the right genetics, training, and strategy. Without any one of these, you will fail.
But ok, if this is a question of faith for you, lets leave it at that.
alin1975 1 year ago
@alin1975 just caught me attention your debate....I get your point but we have to look at these plyers at their time..you know I believe neither Sampras or Edberg could be number 1-2 today..but in their prime they were top guys.You know technics changed so much..rackets are much faster hitting,much lighter to hold and etc....wimbledon grass is much slower for example so the game changed...-of course you are right by the way.
locyka19 1 year ago
@locyka19
Well, we are exactly on the same page :)
I think I said a bunch of the stuff you wrote in the debate below (if memory serves).
And, let me add, I so miss that era of tennis... Edberg will always be my fav player of all time just because of the way his game looked when it was "on" :)
alin1975 1 year ago
@locyka19 Just a month or so ago, I witnessed Edberg defeating Marat Safin in a tournament of the Legends series. Yes, it is not the ATP tour, but it is a match and it shows that the difference is not as big as you might think... ;)
ilian51378 1 year ago
@yasudab1
Theres a general consensus that serve and volley has been made disadvantageous due to the changes. Edberg said so himself in interviews, so has McEnroe. Thats why volleyers slowly vanished.
The new raquets allow for much harder returns=lower reaction time at the net. And the slower surfaces mean that volleys can be caught easier. There are simply too many advantages for staying back and hitting hard and too many disadvantages for moving forward.
alin1975 1 year ago