g****t
发帖数: 4493 | 1 https://news.yahoo.com/hail-novak-djokovic-king-anti-030000251.html
All hail Novak Djokovic, king of anti-tennis
Park MacDougald
Thu, July 22, 2021, 11:00 PM
On Sunday, July 11, Novak Djokovic won his sixth Wimbledon title, cruising
to a four-set victory over the young Italian Matteo Berrettini. It was the
34-year-old’s 20th Grand Slam title, bringing him into a three-way tie with
Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal for the most all-time. Given Djokovic’s
relatively young age (Federer is 39, Nadal 35), his impressive fitness, his
unparalleled mental strength, and his dominance on hard court and grass, the
surfaces on which three of the four Slams are played, he is likely to
finish with several more.
But even if his career ended tomorrow, Djokovic would have a convincing case
for being considered the best tennis player of all time. He has spent the
most consecutive weeks ranked No. 1, is tied with Pete Sampras for the most
year-end No. 1s, and is the only player to win every Grand Slam tournament
at least twice. If he wins the U.S. Open later this summer, and he likely
will, he will not only have the most majors of all time but become the first
player since Rod Laver to win all four in a single year. Perhaps most
important for his legacy, he has a winning record against both Nadal (30-28)
and Federer (27-23), including a 4-1 record against Federer in Grand Slam
finals (losing only their first meeting, at the 2007 U.S. Open) and two
victories against Nadal, the greatest clay-court player in history, at the
French Open, including in this year’s semi-final.
He is also, for the most part, unloved. Crowds cheer against him, especially
when he plays other members of the “Big Three.” I am guilty of this
myself. I find Djokovic boring and tend to pull for whoever happens to be
playing him on a given day. Federer is my favorite and, in my estimation,
the most beautiful player ever to pick up a racket. When he’s on, his game
is like a work of art: aggressive yet cerebral and balletic, with a perfect
mix of delicate touch and fluid power. Nadal is more of a brawler and
grinder, but there’s still something appealing, even aesthetic, in his raw
athleticism and unconventional style — built around the mind-boggling
amount of topspin he applies to his lefty forehand, which he uses to
bludgeon his opponents into submission.
Djokovic, by contrast, plays something like anti-tennis. Although he’s
recently improved his serve and his volleys and possesses one of the best
drop shots in the game, he is fundamentally a conservative, defensive player
. His game is built around consistency, a phenomenal return of serve, and an
equally remarkable ability to chase down balls that he has absolutely no
business getting back in play, forever forcing his opponents to hit one more
shot when they think they’ve already got the point won. Although capable
of attacking when necessary, he’d much prefer to win points by baiting the
other guy into going for too much and either missing or hitting himself into
a vulnerable position. Plus, there’s his well-earned reputation as a
mental giant, which further ratchets up the pressure on opponents. Half the
time, it seems that Djokovic doesn’t really have to do much of anything to
win — the other player is so intimidated by the task of not only breaking
down the Serb’s defense but also out-Zenning him on the crucial points that
his game just falls apart.
This dynamic was painfully evident in what was Djokovic’s toughest test at
this year’s Wimbledon, his semi-final match against the young Canadian
gunslinger Denis Shapovalov. The far better player for most of the first set
, Shapovalov dominated on serve and bullied Djokovic from the baseline,
earning an early break that gave him a chance to serve out the set at 5-4.
In that game, at 30-30, the Canadian inexplicably sailed an easy put-away
long, and then, after fighting back to deuce, made two consecutive backhand
errors to hand over the break. Then, in the first-to-seven tiebreak,
Shapovalov coughed up five unforced errors before double-faulting on set
point (something Dominic Thiem also did against Djokovic in the first set of
the 2020 Australian Open final). Djokovic, throughout all of this, hadn’t
done much except keep the ball deep and inside the court. One moment he was
getting pushed around, the next, he was holding a (for him) commanding one-
set lead, and the difference between the two was seemingly all between
Shapovalov’s ears.
This is a form of greatness, to be sure. Tennis is an almost cruelly
psychological sport, in which, to win, players must continually execute
shots — a second serve, a backhand down the line, a forehand to the open
court — that they know how to hit in their sleep. The question is whether
they can hit these shots repeatedly, under immense pressure, with pride and
glory and millions of dollars on the line. As a fan, you (or at least, I )
want to see someone rise to this challenge. It’s what has made Federer such
a beloved figure. When he wins, he wins by playing tennis the way you feel
it ought to be played: actively, with style and courage and flair, pulling
his opponents around the court as if on a string before finishing them off
with a baseline winner or volley. He seizes the game.
During a great Djokovic performance, on the other hand, it often looks like
the Serb's opponent is trying to climb Everest without oxygen, with Djokovic
in the role of mountain, ice, wind, and cold — a passive, inhuman force
that will break all but the luckiest and bravest of men. You pull for the
human on the other side of the net, but you suspect that, in the end, he
doesn’t have it in him. Usually, you are right.
As a fan, I don’t particularly like that Djokovic has proven himself the
greatest of all time. It feels, at some level, like an inversion of the “
correct” narrative — nature conquering man, rather than the other way
around. But one of the great things about tennis, about sports in general,
is that it has no obligation to conform to our desires, expectations, or the
stories we want to tell. What happens, happens, and fans must deal with it.
Djokovic has triumphed, emphatically, in the face of a tennis world that
has always wanted to see him fail, and the mental strength and self-belief
he has developed in the face of this opposition is without a doubt his
greatest asset as a player. That’s a great story in itself, even if it wasn
’t the one I was hoping for.
Park MacDougald is Life and Arts editor of the Washington Examiner magazine. | f*********e
发帖数: 8453 | | g****t
发帖数: 4493 | 3 还有一篇
https://www.sportskeeda.com/tennis/why-i-novak-djokovic-fan#keeda-comments-
container
Why I can't be a Novak Djokovic fan
To say I am not a Novak Djokovic fan is an understatement. But that is
definitely a better way to frame the sentiment than by saying "If I had to
pick one player to play tennis for my life, I wouldn't pick Djokovic even
though I'd be fully aware that he was my best chance of staying alive."
But even I have to grudgingly admit that Novak Djokovic might just be the
greatest tennis player of all time, even if he thinks the matter is up for
debate. Or maybe especially now that he thinks it is up for debate.
Ever since Djokovic's mother Dijana said, "The King is dead! Long live the
King!" in response to her son beating Roger Federer in the 2008 Australian
Open semifinals, I have hated him with the same burning passion reserved for
fascists and paperbacks that use an image from the movie as their cover
photo. And 13-something years later, watching them write his name on the
wall of Wimbledon winners for the third time on the trot has only reinforced
those feelings.
But he is here. He has found his way into the promised land that is 20 Grand
Slams, and no longer can the Rafans and the Fedfans pretend that they are
blind. Novak Djokovic is, for all intents and purposes, statistically just
as good as (if not better than) Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. And he is
bound to get better and better. And better.
God help the next person trying to shoehorn a number into BELIEVE by the
time Djokovic retires.
But just how did Novak Djokovic become this good? The last point of the Serb
's final win over Matteo Berrettini gives us a fair illustration of that.
The rally lasts 11 shots, and Djokovic, who is at championship point and
leading 5-3 in the fourth set, plays a series of conservative strokes.
He waits for his opponent to make a mistake. He serves up a couple of slices
and a couple of regulation backhands in the knowledge that Berrettini has
to blink first, which he does by hitting the ball into the net.
When the trap he laid out in cold blood works, Djokovic lifts his arms to
the heavens. It is cold and calculating and smart, but that is not the way I
like my tennis.
Novak Djokovic is almost too perfect, compared to the more human Roger
Federer and Rafael Nadal
I have spent a lot of time trying to understand why I dislike watching Novak
Djokovic so much. It is not simply that he is better than the players I
like. It is not because he is arrogant or anything about his achievements;
the Serb in fact is one of the most chill and humble players off the court.
Why then? It all comes down to something I can only vaguely describe as "
coldness".
You might understand this better if you are a fan of Roger Federer or Rafael
Nadal. There is a warmth about their playing style that consumes you from
the moment you start watching them, turning you from a consumer to a
partaker in the act.
Federer, with his genius and finesse, and Nadal, with his resilience and
athleticism, represent something 'alive' in the game. They add a certain
unpredictability to the game that is decidedly human.
The same can be said about the springy Gael Monfils or the stubborn Juan
Martin Del Potro too. It can even be said about the mercurial Nick Kyrgios.
But when I have to add an adjective to Novak Djokovic, I can only say that
he is unbeatable. That he defends about as well as the walls of Troy (before
the whole gimmick with the horse, obviously). That he has no weakness in
his game which is obvious, or even obscure.
For me personally, instead of those qualities being an addition to the game
- like in the case of the aforementioned players - it becomes a subtraction.
Like the 20th century being afraid that the advent of industrialization and
mechanization would make people more emotionless, Novak Djokovic feels (to
me) like he has taken away the thing that makes tennis, tennis.
Novak Djokovic celebrating his win at Wimbledon 2021
Novak Djokovic celebrating his win at Wimbledon 2021
Novak Djokovic reaches balls he has no right to reach, but he doesn’t show
signs of fatigue. By contrast, Rafael Nadal often does, and that's why it is
so easy to love the Spaniard. You see him yell and push every single muscle
to its extreme and you are convinced he is human persistence personified.
Novak Djokovic hits shots he has no right to, without squandering the
easiest of chances. By contrast, Roger Federer often does the latter, which
is why it is so easy to love the Swiss. One moment you see him hit the most
beautiful slice you have ever seen in your life, and the very next moment
you are rubbing your nose after he hits the easiest of volleys into the net.
But that is why I love this sport. And Novak Djokovic, by being too
consistent and too perfect and too careful, represents to me everything I
don't like about it. To be blunt, Djokovic is simply too good to be excited
about.
Now I am not saying his wins mean anything less because of this. They don't.
But I am fairly certain that Federer would have gone for the audacious by
the fifth shot, and so it is impossible for me to find comfort in anything
else.
I will end this by quoting Patrick Rothfuss in the The Wise Man’s fear, a
passage that is tailor-made for the point I wish to make:
Bredon’s expression softened, and his voice became almost like an entreaty.
"Tak reflects the subtle turning of the world. It is a mirror we hold to
life. No one wins a dance, boy. The point of dancing is the motion that a
body makes. A well-played game of tak reveals the moving of a mind. There is
a beauty to these things for those with eyes to see it."
He gestured at the brief and brutal lay of stones between us. "Look at that.
Why would I ever want to win a game such as this?"I looked down at the
board. "The point isn’t to win?" I asked."The point," Bredon said grandly,
"is to play a beautiful game." He lifted his hands and shrugged, his face
breaking into a beatific smile. "Why would I want to win anything other than
a beautiful game?"
If I sound bitter, that is because I am. It is in the nature of fans to be
bitter about the players they support no longer being the best. But don't
let that distract you from the fact that Novak Djokovic is head and
shoulders above anyone else who has played the game. Statistically, of
course. | Y****3
发帖数: 963 | 4 Park MacDougald同志的文章生动记录了自己作为奶粉痛苦转型鸡粉的心路历程. | f***n
发帖数: 4682 | 5 说小德打得保守 就等对方失误 感觉这不是事实。
就是小德跟小贝那场 小德打得也很有侵略性 很多球就是有意往边边角角打得 即使前
一个球这么打失误 下一个球他还敢这么打。
【在 g****t 的大作中提到】
: 还有一篇
: https://www.sportskeeda.com/tennis/why-i-novak-djokovic-fan#keeda-comments-
: container
: Why I can't be a Novak Djokovic fan
: To say I am not a Novak Djokovic fan is an understatement. But that is
: definitely a better way to frame the sentiment than by saying "If I had to
: pick one player to play tennis for my life, I wouldn't pick Djokovic even
: though I'd be fully aware that he was my best chance of staying alive."
: But even I have to grudgingly admit that Novak Djokovic might just be the
: greatest tennis player of all time, even if he thinks the matter is up for
| P*******e
发帖数: 39399 | 6 啥叫保守
上网最多的吧 线路也很多变吧
底线相持球多就叫保守？ 小德也就是不那么暴力而已 高压球确实有点joke
【在 f***n 的大作中提到】
: 说小德打得保守 就等对方失误 感觉这不是事实。
: 就是小德跟小贝那场 小德打得也很有侵略性 很多球就是有意往边边角角打得 即使前
: 一个球这么打失误 下一个球他还敢这么打。
| l**********n
发帖数: 49 | 7 言论自由，这种垃圾文章，无视它就好了。大家都无视，这样的垃圾就少了。
抓眼球的东西，要么无脑捧，这个算无脑黑，就是为了吸睛，对网球运动没好处。而且
网球也不是美国媒体所的算的，麦肯罗不就是德迷嘛。
市场化的网球，欧洲美国影响当然巨大。老德作为非欧盟国家非北约国家的，自然要吃
亏与另外两大。正常。李娜不也是占了中国市场的光才有这么高的地位。
【在 P*******e 的大作中提到】
: 啥叫保守
: 上网最多的吧 线路也很多变吧
: 底线相持球多就叫保守？ 小德也就是不那么暴力而已 高压球确实有点joke
| R******6
发帖数: 609 | 8 老德的shot太牛，旋转和pace配合完美，几板稳健的进攻，优势就出来了，不需要
drama。有人就受不了他的稳健。类似的还有桑神，很多人觉得无聊
老德我还能看，桑神我也欣赏不来
没有人黑桑神“网球终结者”吗？ | |
|
