Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Opste teniske diskusije,vijesti...

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Simon objasnjava :

    "Talent, no one knows what it is. They talked about it with me enormously until I was twenty-one, then when I got stronger I went over to the other side. When I qualified for the Australian Open and I'd beaten Berdych(2006), I was a genius. That's what Équipe wrote: 'Genius'. Me, I said: 'I'm 130th. in the world, I'm no genius.' In France, the word talent is associated with three things: having good hands - and as I have zero hands, I have no talent - technique - the impression of fluidity - and attacking. Basically, "flamboyance" is confused with talent. I often hear that Feliciano Lopez has talent and I piss on that. Ah Lopez the attacker ... No, Lopez is a defender. Everyone knows he's a baseliner who serves more than he volleys. He has the image of a gifted serve-and-volleyer. But I find the serve-and-volleyer is very often un-gifted. They guy hits a hard serve and moves up to volley because, for him, it's the easiest way to win a point.

    "Me, I have zero hands but I have enormous talent. There are simply different talents, some more obvious than others. What's talent? When Richard (Gasquet) sends a backhand ten miles from the corner of the stands, they say talent. They're right. But when Rafa (Nadal) does the same with a forehand, they say it's strength, it's physical. Everyone agrees on Federer's talent, but Djokovic, pffft, they have trouble ... He has no great shot. Except you serve at him 275 kph and he takes it every time in the middle of the racquet. That's an incredible talent. If you ask Jan (De Witt, his coach) who has the most talent, Roger or Novak, he'll hesitate.

    "Television distorts perceptions. People don't see what's so special about Kei Nishikori. He has the best two-handed backhand I've ever seen. He finds incredible angles but that doesn't make an impression. I often use the example of Mika (Llodra). He has an amazing volley and touch but he can't hit a correct forehand. Is he gifted? Safin had a patent on talent all his career, but when it came to hands, he was like me ... Ernests Gulbis, the same. He's talented, full stop. If he loses, it's because he doesn't feel like playing.

    "In France, in the beginning, I had the impression that it was better to be less good, but with talent, that a Gulbis who's number 50 is more esteemed than a Ferrer who's 3. Now, I couldn't care less whether people see if I have talent or not ... I usually answer that my talent is my timing. It's weighing 70 kg. and hitting 50 winners against Rafa in Rome (last year). I hope he doesn't take this the wrong way, but when I see that they think that I have less talent than Jo (Tsonga), it's impressive. Jo hammers every shot. It's very forceful. Between us four, the one who has the most talent, it's Gaël (Monfils),"
    sigpic

    Always somewhere Miss you where I've been I'll be back to love you again

    U crnim rupama možeš ludo da se zezaš. Da lebdiš iznad zemlje. Da slušaš rock ´n´ roll.Dozivaš kišu.
    Ili da mazneš neku lepu ribu. Samo je bezveze kada se probudiš….

    Comment


    • Pametno zbori Žil, što je za očekivati od nekoga ko poseduje jedan od najviših IQ-a na turu.
      Ukratko čovek objasni svu bit teniske igre.
      Ujedno sjajna pouka za mlade naraštaje koja bi im poput mantre trebala biti vodiljom u budućem bavljenju tenisom.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • Definitivno jedna od najboljih izjava nekog od igrača zadnjih godina, bez sekunde šupljiranja...a eto i on ističe Keijev dvoručni, koji je fkt magičan

        jedina stvar koju je zaboravio spomenuti su povrede...jedan od najvećih talenata je igrati ono u čemu si dobar, a da tijelo ne trpi previše...jer ako je tehnika loša...možeš udarati kako hoćeš, ali ne koliko hoćeš
        Last edited by shminka; 09-02-15, 09:41.

        Comment


        • Comment


          • Postotak pobjeda u odlučujućem setu:
            1. Nishikori .782
            2. Borg .744
            3. Đoković .729
            4. Nadal .700
            5. Connors .690
            6. Laver .687
            7. Murray .687
            8. McEnroe .686
            9. Sampras .682
            10. Kriek .676
            11. Del Potro .676

            @NI

            Comment


            • Izasle su nominacije za Laureus nagrade i tenis je bas zastupljen, Djokovic za sportistu godine, Li Na i Serena za sportiskinju godine, DC tim Svajcarske za tim godine i breakthrough yera Cilic i ponovo DC tim Svajcarske

              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


              • http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ten...st-injury.html
                SignaturE se cheka ...sigpic

                Comment


                • http://www.b92.net/sport/tenis/vesti...&nav_id=957529
                  sloboda ili ništa

                  Comment


                  • Naslov tendeciozan, ali pitanje interesantno. Mislim da se vec ovde vodila mala diskusija o ovome. Nije pitanje samo Djokovic vs Federer, nego Simon kaze njegov stav sta je to uopste talent u tenisu i zasto se neko proglasi talentiranim, a drugi ne ili ne dovoljno.
                    U Francuskoj se talenat povezuje sa tri stvari – sa dobrim ’rukama’, što ja nemam, sa tehnikom koja podrazumeva utisak lakoće, i sa napadačkom igrom.
                    Dali je ovo definicija koja se treba prihvatiti i koja se prihvaca sa lakocom?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Niki View Post
                      Naslov tendeciozan, ali pitanje interesantno. Mislim da se vec ovde vodila mala diskusija o ovome. Nije pitanje samo Djokovic vs Federer, nego Simon kaze njegov stav sta je to uopste talent u tenisu i zasto se neko proglasi talentiranim, a drugi ne ili ne dovoljno.
                      U Francuskoj se talenat povezuje sa tri stvari – sa dobrim ’rukama’, što ja nemam, sa tehnikom koja podrazumeva utisak lakoće, i sa napadačkom igrom.
                      Dali je ovo definicija koja se treba prihvatiti i koja se prihvaca sa lakocom?
                      Ma naslov je tipican za nase medije, a od ovog teksta najmanje me zanima poredjenje Djokovica i Federera, jer Simon je pogodio dosta stvari bas u centar, treba li talenat vezivati za lepotu?
                      sloboda ili ništa

                      Comment


                      • Treba talenat vezivati za lakocu igranja, u svakom sportu
                        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


                        • Mislim da upravo to dovodi Simon u pitanje, lakocu igranja, ljepotu kao reper za talent.
                          Iako moram priznati da je to ono sto intuitivno vezemo za talent.
                          Ali, po toj logici samo je Federer talentiran u celini . . .

                          Comment


                          • Nisam rekla da talenat treba vezivati samo za lakocu igranja, nego sam odgovorila na pitanje trebali talenat vezivati za lepotu
                            Po meni, aposolutno ga treba vezivati za lepotu i lakocu igranja, ali nisu samo ti igraci talentovani, jednostavno se kod njih to najlakse uoci.

                            Ali opste je poznato da je talenat 10% uspeha, ako je i toliko i da je rad ono sto presudi.
                            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


                            • Simonova izjava je najbolja izjava koju sam ja procitao od neki teniser do sada, a pritom i najrealnija. Kapa dole Gile, zaista
                              OVAKO

                              Comment


                              • Simon zapravo hoce one 90% rada staviti ispred onih 10% talenta. I to je normalna reakcija svakoga ko se oseca na neki nacin inferiorniji. On zapravo govori o svojim, a i ostalim "kompleksima" manje talentovanog igraca prema onome koji je vise talentovan. Jel vise cenimo talent ili rad? Ne svaki talentirani igrac postane i uspesan, ili obrnuto. To i pokazuje primerima koje daje. Ipak imam utisak da se on oseca "isfrustriranim" talentom i uspehom Federera. . .
                                Federer je zaista redak primer "cistog" talenta koji to pretoci u neverovatan uspeh. Ne i jedini.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X