Originally posted by Weltschmerz
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Vrelo australijsko varljivo leto 2022, ispisivanje istorije 🤟
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfzsyKXSs-Y
Here's the most remarkable thing to me about Federer: Seems to me that the more you know about tennis, the more amazed you are by the guy. If you know nothing at all about tennis, he's amazing. If you know a little something about tennis—maybe you have played a few times in your life—he's more amazing. If you know a little more about tennis—maybe you played in high school and once had illusions of becoming a pro—he's even MORE amazing. And if you were a great player—if you are a McEnroe or a Connors or a Jim Courier—then Federer is preposterously amazing
sigpic
Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you...
with experience.
- Likes 2
-
Originally posted by bojanaBG View Post
Mislim da bi i Djokovic preokrenuo taj mec da je bio u drugacijoj situaciji, da nije imao brodolom na OI i da nije jurio 4.slem u godini, njega je tu pritisak bas unistio, a Nadal je bio u totalno suprotnoj situaciji, niko nije ocekivao da osvoji, bio je underdog i u finalu, a on obozava takve situacije.
Comment
-
Originally posted by NI View Post
I da nije bio strasno fizicki umoran. Fizicki umor je presudio!
Oni silni dropshotovi, od kojih je proslo samo nekoliko su bas neobjasnjivihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfzsyKXSs-Y
Here's the most remarkable thing to me about Federer: Seems to me that the more you know about tennis, the more amazed you are by the guy. If you know nothing at all about tennis, he's amazing. If you know a little something about tennis—maybe you have played a few times in your life—he's more amazing. If you know a little more about tennis—maybe you played in high school and once had illusions of becoming a pro—he's even MORE amazing. And if you were a great player—if you are a McEnroe or a Connors or a Jim Courier—then Federer is preposterously amazing
sigpic
Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you...
with experience.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bojanaBG View Post
I jeste i nije, jer je on ipak vracao brejkove, tada je igrao dobro, ali cim je on bio u sansi da povede, pravio je sulude greske i sulude odluke.
Oni silni dropshotovi, od kojih je proslo samo nekoliko su bas neobjasnjivi
Comment
-
Ma publika je nervirala Medvedeva ceo mec, ali recimo onaj gem u 5.setu, taman je vratio brejk, bilo je 5:5 i imao je sansu da povede, izgledao je u tom trenutku cak i fizicki bolje od Nadala i onda prospe sve u narednom gemu.
Tu jep siha presudila, tu nije bio problem fizicko stanje...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfzsyKXSs-Y
Here's the most remarkable thing to me about Federer: Seems to me that the more you know about tennis, the more amazed you are by the guy. If you know nothing at all about tennis, he's amazing. If you know a little something about tennis—maybe you have played a few times in your life—he's more amazing. If you know a little more about tennis—maybe you played in high school and once had illusions of becoming a pro—he's even MORE amazing. And if you were a great player—if you are a McEnroe or a Connors or a Jim Courier—then Federer is preposterously amazing
sigpic
Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you...
with experience.
Comment
-
Bojana,
Svaki mec ima svoju dinamiku, splet okolnosti itd. Novakov "come back" protiv Ciicipasa je impresivniji nego Rafin protiv Medvedeva. Glavni razlog za Novakov uspjeh je Novak, a za Rafin Danil. Kada je Medvedev dosao do 2:2, 5:5, po svakom objektivnom kriterijumu je bio favorit, ali nije jasno mislio za razliku od Rafe. Rafin plan je cijelo vrijeme bio: "Samo da prezivim, mozda Danilu nivo padne!" Plan je sjajno proradio, jer je Danilov nivo strahovito pao. Ali da je Nadala bio stvarno umoran, plan ne bi proradio.
Novak na USO je bio stvarno umoran i to je poremetilo njegovu vjeru u sebe. Osim toga Novak nije dobar u taktici cekanja da protivnikov nivo padne. On to, za razliku od Rafe, ne umije. Novak je dobar u taktici: "Ja cu da dignem nivo." Dizanje nivoa nije bilo moguce zbog umora.
Comment
-
Bas se ne slazem da je Nadal pobedio samo zato sto je Medvedev pao i da se on nije nista pitao. I malo je glupo napisati da je Djokovicev comeback impresivniji, kao da se i tamo Cicipas nije pogubio kad je poveo 2:0.
Nadal je jasno promenio taktiku od 2.seta, cak je i servirao za taj set, imao vise puta prednost u TB i na kraju je ipak Medvedev uspeo nekako da izvuce.
Nadal je bas miksovao igru, slao slajs, pa balon, stalno nalazio nov nacin da uzme poen, nesto sto nije bas cesto radio u karijeri i tu samo covek moze da mu skine kapu.
I kao sto rekoh, imao je Medvedev pred kraj sasvim dovoljno energije, jer je vracao brejk vise puta u 5.setu, ali nije znao da odservira kad je trebao da povede, sto znaci da je ipak imao neki strah i da se tada stegao.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfzsyKXSs-Y
Here's the most remarkable thing to me about Federer: Seems to me that the more you know about tennis, the more amazed you are by the guy. If you know nothing at all about tennis, he's amazing. If you know a little something about tennis—maybe you have played a few times in your life—he's more amazing. If you know a little more about tennis—maybe you played in high school and once had illusions of becoming a pro—he's even MORE amazing. And if you were a great player—if you are a McEnroe or a Connors or a Jim Courier—then Federer is preposterously amazing
sigpic
Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you...
with experience.
Comment
-
Mozda i najveci trijumf u Nadalovoj karijeri, ako se uzmu okolnosti: 35 godina, skoro 36, AO koji mu ocito najmanje odgovara, tvrda podloga, skoro godina dana bez tenisa, 6 meseca posle operacije, 0-2 protiv Medvedeva, pa i nisto nije bilo na njegovoj strani, sem njegova nadrealna volja i strast za tenis.
Kada je zavrsio prvi set, gde je realno bio potpuno nadigran, pitala sam se, zasto Rafa toliko taktizira, zar se cuva za peti set? I upravo je to i radio, on je mentalno bio spreman na pet seta, pa koliko to trajalo. Svi smo mislili da ce krenuti agresivno, da dobije prednost u prva dva seta, a dogodilo se sve suprotno, i ipak je pobedio. On je prosto bio psihicki spreman da sve proba sto zna i ume i to je uradio. Rekao je pre neki dan, da nije fizicki umoran generalno, nego da nije ocekivao da ce uopste doci do finala. Ali, kade je jednom dosao, resio je da ce sve uraditi da ostane u mecu. I tako bi.
Fantastican povratak, uzimajuci sve u obzir, jedinstven u njegovoj karijeri, a i uopste.
Medvedev s druge strane nije bio spreman na pet seta, pre svega mentalno, ocito i fizicki. Kade je poveo 2-0 on je cekao da Rafa padne fizicki, svi su realno cekali. A, Rafa promenio igru i ne samo sto nije padao, nego je jos bolje igrao. Neverovatno. Nema se sta drugo reci ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by bojanaBG View PostBas se ne slazem da je Nadal pobedio samo zato sto je Medvedev pao i da se on nije nista pitao. I malo je glupo napisati da je Djokovicev comeback impresivniji, kao da se i tamo Cicipas nije pogubio kad je poveo 2:0.
Igracki, za mene je Djokovicev "come back" impresivniji. Cicipas nije pao.
Comment
-
Originally posted by NI View Post
Nije pobijedio samo zato sto je Medvedev pao. Bilo je vise faktora. Nadalo sampionski duh, siroki spektar udarac koje moze da odigra, voleje, dropovi, BH vineri itd. Sve jedno je glavni faktor bio Medvedova ludost, Tacno je da je Nadal promijenio taktitku poslije prvo seta, ali to nije imalo presudni uticaj. Medvedeve je dio bolji do 3:2 u trecem setu. Drugi set je bio izjednacen zato sto je Medvedev lose servirao.
Igracki, za mene je Djokovicev "come back" impresivniji. Cicipas nije pao.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfzsyKXSs-Y
Here's the most remarkable thing to me about Federer: Seems to me that the more you know about tennis, the more amazed you are by the guy. If you know nothing at all about tennis, he's amazing. If you know a little something about tennis—maybe you have played a few times in your life—he's more amazing. If you know a little more about tennis—maybe you played in high school and once had illusions of becoming a pro—he's even MORE amazing. And if you were a great player—if you are a McEnroe or a Connors or a Jim Courier—then Federer is preposterously amazing
sigpic
Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you...
with experience.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bojanaBG View Post
Za mene je isto, jer je Nadal bio bolji igrac vec od 2.seta, ali je mogao uprkos tome da izgubi sa 3:0Last edited by NI; 31-01-22, 13:18.
Comment
-
Nadal je igrao neverovatno i pobedio je jer prakticno nije gresio. Imao je tempo koji nije gubio maltene uopste. Medvedev je podbacio sa servisima. Ocajan je u igri na mrezi i zicere kljucne je katastrofalno igrao. Lose je koristio brejk lopte i nije puno menjao taktiku.
Neprihvatljivo je da bude tako slabo fizicki spreman.
Zatim, tehnika mu je izuzetno nezgrapna. Nimalo nije fleksibilan pri promena pravca i takticki nije bio dovoljno dobar. Nema ni iskustva.
Comment
-
Potpuno tačno https://sportklub.rs/tenis/atp/svako...d-nema-novaka/“La vostra fama è come il fiore, che nasce e muore, e si secca allo stesso sole che gli ha dato vita dall'acerba terra"
Comment
Comment