How Strong is THIS Era? | Mailbag

Hello everyone, Filthy Gil here and it's time for another inbox where I answer your questions, your observations and ultimately your comments about tennis or anything else I posted on the YouTube Community tab about 24 hours ago we reached the triple digits in comments on how. On that, well done, I thank everyone who participates in these

mailbag

s. I pulled out about 26 of them. The US Open is just around the corner. Life is good. What could be better than

this

? Let's get started. The first comment is from Hardy Har. Hi Gill. I recently converted. Mindful of an interesting statistic, Stefano's guys have by far the worst record in finals in the current top 10.

His record is 10 and 17 and the only other player with a losing record in finals in the top 10 is Tiafo with three and four, plus 13 of his 17 losses in finals were in straight sets and only two of his 10 wins were over the team of the top 10 players in the 2019 tour finals and Rublev in Monte Carlo 2021. I don't want to dunk on Titi's pass and in fact I think it's very impressive that he's had the consistency in recent years to remain in the top 10 despite

this

obvious deficiency. It says something that he is in the top five in the final race right now even though he only won one 250 tournament.

I wonder if he has. Any thoughts on what he needs to change in his game or his mentality to peak later in tournaments and emerge as champion more often before we get to the last part of that question? Let me go even deeper than what you did in his final resume. It's very interesting that you mention this. I didn't realize this. I knew he didn't have a good record in the finals because I knew he was very bad at outdoor hardcore tournaments. He hadn't won a title in a hardcore outdoor event until Los Cabos. I knew he had a terrible record in ATP 500 finals.

I think he still does. I don't think he's won one yet, unless I'm forgetting something. He's like Owen Seven, but I didn't realize how bad he was. If I'm completely honest, the interesting thing is that most of his finals have been against good players and he hasn't actually suffered many bad losses in finals, his record against players outside the top ten is nine and three and I'm counting by the way. something. I don't think you're counting what his victory is over Demon or in the next generation finals in 2018. That would make his record 11 and 17 instead of 10 and 17.

So I'll count nine and three against players outside the top ten and 2 and 14 against players inside the top ten, so there has been a clear line of demarcation against who he hasn't had enough big wins against or I. I will say that he hasn't beaten enough good players in the finals, but he hasn't had any problem beating players that he is much better than in the finals with a record of nine and three. Also, I think the reason this doesn't feel like that. What has been very important for his career is that he has only suffered one defeat in a grand final that has been particularly disappointing, which was against George last year in Cincinnati, a final that he was not only expected to win, but also a final in which I found his performance particularly disappointing apart from the two major final losses to Djokovic at Masters level Nadal and Djokovic twice plus the loss in church and then of course he has the wins at the Masters 1000 in Monte Carlo over Titi's pass or sorry for Rublev. and davidovichvikina and has the Tour Finals winning team, so he's had a few of those moments, but overall it's been a strange case, he hasn't performed as well against the top 10 players in the finals compared to his performance against the top 10. players out of the finals early in Steph's career.

I think he was a fierce competitor with limitless belief. He really thought that he could be number one in the world and that he could have one of the best careers of all time. I think he believed that because uh, he was never proven wrong, he was never proven wrong and the way he was competing really made it clear that he was once again a fierce competitor. I think that has toned down a little bit, it has diminished. I think he resigns himself a little more quickly. Over the last three years, compared to what we were seeing in 2018 and 2019, yeah, I think that resignation starts to show in the way that he, you know, when he competes against the best in the world, that's something that I've observed.

That's certainly an area where I hope he can bring that back. I think moving away from Apostolos and Mark Philipus as his full-time coach shows me that he has a chance to change something like this and he has. nothing to do with philipusis being someone who is going to give better advice to CT Paws than apostolos, that could be true, but I'm not even talking about that right now, what I'm talking about is just showing that you don't agree agree with where you are. You are in your career and I couldn't tell with Titi's pass. Are you okay being a level two player?

Are you okay being someone who makes it to the end of year championships every year and makes it to a bunch of big finals in a couple? at least every year, are you okay with being that guy or are you still hungry to go to the next level to take the next step, the first step to separate yourself from his father? To me, it shows me that yes, he doesn't agree with how things have been. been going, he wants to do better and that's huge to me, that's the kind of thing that could change this, but ultimately for him to have a better record in the finals, the easiest way to do it is just to Honestly , is a player who beats the best in the world more often, which again at the beginning of his career is the youngest player to beat Federal and Djokovic, the youngest player to beat all three.

I think it was a combination of his qualities. as a competitor at that point in his career, maybe they didn't respect his forehand enough at that particular time and then they learned too quickly, the whole circuit now knows that he's possibly up there with, you know, maybe the best forehand in the world. . if not second, third or fourth and the back is the worst in the top ten, now everyone knows that I don't know in 2018 and 2019, I don't know if similar players were really playing with him like that and I think that. could also be a factor, okay let's move on.

The next one is from Dimitri. Hello everyone loves his content. I'm not sure if you've answered this in a previous

mailbag

, but I'll ask again because it seems to appear in every tennis comment section some people actually believe that right now we're in a weak era for tennis when in reality it's all contrary. I'm not sure if your perspective is clouded by your disdain for Djokovic and your desire to discredit all of his achievements or if it's just pure ignorance, regardless of the reason, today's players have almost no weaknesses in their game and their resilience is incredible .

Players like the middle-aged Zverev, who stand six-foot-six and move like gazelles, would be freaks of nature in any bygone era, but right now they are our chronic underachievers. Due to the dominance of the big three in Alcaraz, I think tennis is the

strong

est it has ever been in terms of quality and will only continue to improve if you share my sentiment, please repeat it louder for the haters in the back, if you disagree, offer a rebuttal, regards, awesome comment. There are parts I agree with and there are parts I disagree with. I agree with your thoughts on Medi and Zverev, the fact that if you plot them in the 1990s like people lost their minds, people would say: who are these? aliens, what's going on what planet you are on, but I also think it's important to keep in mind that that's true for every era and that probably won't change.

I mean, maybe we will reach some kind of limit, but so far, all eras of tennis. it gets better if you're going to use that kind of logic if you're going to say what would happen if we took this player and just put him, you know, we had him play 20 years ago, every player would dominate, so while I think that's true, I don't I do. I don't think that's a good argument to evaluate how

strong

the current effectiveness is right now relative to uh, I don't know how hard, does Djokovic have it? I think it is not necessary to compare what the players are like with previous eras. but try to evaluate them from the point of view of the current ERA and look, my opinion on this in the past has been that the era of the big three was not a normal era and compared to the big three or even the big four because Andy Murray is an all-time Great player who would have won between seven and nine Majors if he had played in a more normal era, in my opinion, if you are going to compare a mistake with that, then every era or at least most of the errors will look quite weak. but those who want to point out that you know that since Federer left the scene and Nadal has had a difficult situation in the last year and it's already over, you know, various periods of time, uh he's been absent for some time, they seem to be zverev medium like By very good they are, they are players with many flaws, they have great flaws, they have incredible strengths, that is why they are so good because they are simply exceptional, but they are, they are imperfect tennis players, whereas, unless you are really picky about Federer Nadal and Djokovic are perfect tennis players, they are movements, yes, physical, yes, mental, yes, offense, yes, defense, yes, like it's the total package.

Djokovic has had to compete a lot with that level in the last few years, you know, a couple of years, uh no. Not always, he has not always had to compete with that, now he does it because Alcaraz is yes, he has no flaws, he is not a player with flaws. Medford Evans veravar, so, Medford, they are better than Roundich, and less defective in my opinion, and have greater. strengths strengths brighter than roundich Nishikori dimitrov uh maybe even in many ways they are better than even Ferrer, who you know I love, so yes, they are very good, but they are also, uh, they are not I wouldn't say this is the best tennis effectiveness of all time.

No, I wouldn't say that either. It was harder to win a Major in 2013 than it is now. The next one is from Beth and I wanted to get it. to this one, uh, last week, I'm really glad I can do it now, hello, what exactly is Tommy Paul doing that bothers Alcaraz so much? It seems like a sin for Paul to highlight several weaknesses in Alcaraz's game that other players don't. exploit or lack the tools to do so I am interested in hearing your opinion. I thought a lot about this. I think there are some dynamics at play.

First of all, let me clarify this. I don't think Tommy Paul is similar to Yannick. sinner in the way he plays tennis is quite different. I also think part of this is not a stylistic issue and alcaraz was a little out of place last year in Canada he was a little out of place this year in Canada in Cincinnati just not at his best and Tommy Paul has shown the mentality of that when he believes and he's under the lights and it's a full stadium and it's showtime and his juices are flowing, he's capable of playing very, very, very high level tennis, so easily a top 10 level in my opinion. top.

So you have a player playing at a top 10 level against an Alcaraz that is a little out of place and you have close games and you get a Tommy Paul win and that in itself isn't that far-fetched, but I'll offer some theories as to why stylistically Paul. A couple of things could cause problems for Alcaraz, first of all, the way Tommy returns his second serve, he returns second serves in general, the way he returns his backhand early and the ball gets to you very, very quickly, it's very good at shortening your backhand backswing. and taking the ball up on a hard and it really helps him attack alcaraz's second serve, his kick serve wide overall and then I think when alcaraz serves the forehand, uh, Tommy does a pretty good job of staying threatening , is the weakest return. but Paul will still try to play very, very fast and I think that many times he has been able to run after the plus one taking the ball early.

Now Sinner plays very, very fast. We've talked about rushing Alcaraz, but Yannick does it with his Tommy power takes up a lot of his time, so I think Tommy plays fast in his own way and that's good against Carlitos, but I think the most significant thing is how much pressure he applies with his net running and that could give Alcaraz a little more trouble. turning defense into offense from the back of the court and that was a big problem in Canada in Cincinnati, you can see Tommy Paul's numbers in net, they were actually pretty poor, he overshot a lot and had a lot of failed drives down the line. but I think that helps him play as an outker as well, so playing fast on the return, getting the ball early, moving forward, those are the most important things now, what is the best part of Tommy Paul's game in general, is his movement, it is his athleticism. in the way he completely closes out Aquaraz's drop shot, I think I mentioned this in some video, uh, in Canada, but yeah, he completely closes out Alcaraz's drop shot, hugs the baseline, it's very, veryFast, has great hands when going forward and any volley will do it.

There is literally nothing to Paul's game, particularly a hard drive that leaves the drop open, so now it's Alcaraz trying to finish off his power. Tommy is a great power absorber on the backhand side, it's the forehand side where I don't think he's great. power absorbent, but for some reason Paul's forehand has held up against Algoraz in both matches they've played, at least this year, and that's been the main key for him, so that's my answer for that matter. why Tommy has bothered Alcaraz so often and By the way, the match they played in Miami was a 6-4-6-4 victory for Alcaraz.

It was great tennis, but it was a level of Alcaraz that Alcaraz was at in his prime. I guess what I'm saying is that I think that form had something to do with what we saw these last two weeks. The next one is from Andrew. Do you think the growing rivalry with Alcaraz will give Djokovic an extra level of motivation that could extend this prime? stage of your career in the past you mentioned motivation as a potential barrier and Novak is curious to hear your thoughts, yes, I have talked about this, uh, I think, uh, I think so, I think having a rival who is pressuring you is First of all, something that Novak will be very used to, he's had that throughout his career and to continue to have that for me is a great thing for his motivation when he has to get up early in the morning and continue to be so disciplined, focused and hardworking. like any other. another player, it helps to have someone pushing you to get there, it helps, so yeah, it's a good thing for Novak's motivation from Mark, hey, I love your content.

I'm just curious. I have observed that Djokovic versus Alcaraz go head to head. The underdogs have usually emerged victorious. Is there some kind of underdog mentality that allows them to play better as underdogs? I feel like I've noticed it a bit in Novak's career in general, but it may be off base. I also realize that this is a fairly small sample size. size with their head-to-heads yes, this is quite true, this is quite true, but I think the only match where I can say that the underdog status played a real role was that rule at Garros, it is because it is possible that , if he enters that match, Alcaraz, who was the favorite who was the favorite in that match according to the odds according to many spectators including me if that was not the case and Alcaraz felt that he was not there was not much pressure on him to win So obviously that match could have been significantly different because ultimately it was the pressure and stress that Alcaraz was feeling that made it impossible for him to win that match.

He couldn't handle it. That's the only match I think underdog status versus favorite status. He really played an important role, but other than that, you are right about the Madrid game. I could be remembering wrong, but I think Djokovic would have been the favorite coming into that match, even though Alcaraz was coming off a win over Nadal and Novak. I'm still running, uh, I still feel like Novak would have been the favorite there, it's just that Alcaraz hadn't gotten there as the tier one player, but he wasn't getting there, certainly at Wimbledon, Novak was the favorite and, uh, at Cincinnati.

Novak was the favorite, so oh, sorry, let's talk about that too, so that's another zag. Djokovic was the favorite in Cincy, he was. I think I saw the line at -150 on the American odds. I know that doesn't mean anything to you. You Europeans, but yes, he was the favorite and that's just because of the form he had, Novak looked very, very strong, he was winning his matches in straight sets, Alcaraz was reeling, Alcaraz was fighting and that's what made the odds were, especially because of the time on court disparity 10 and a half hours versus five hours that's a big deal and that's why Djokovic was the favorite, so favorite one last time by Nico, hey Gil, what do you think about the newly invented ATP Baseline Financial Security System, yeah, uh?

The ATP has recently announced let me let me get this out the ATP has announced Baseline, a transformative financial security program for ATP players that will launch in 2024 as part of a three-year trial comprised of three pillars. Baseline represents a significant step. I'm going to try to skip the PR stuff. Well, the first pillar of the program is guaranteed base earnings, which guarantees minimum income levels for the top 250 ranked individual players each season, should a player's prize money end up below the guaranteed threshold, the ATP step in to cover the shortfall for the 2024 season, these levels are 300,000 if your top 100,150,000 are 101 to 175 and 75,000 176 to 250.

This guarantee will allow players to plan their seasons with greater certainty, focus on their game and invest in their teams, this includes covering the expenses of personal coaches and physiotherapists as well as travel, then there is injury protection which provides support for players who play fewer than nine ATP Tour and Challenger tour events in a season due to an injury. This progressive initiative includes thresholds set at 200,000 for the top 100 hundred thousand for 101 to 175 and 50,000 for 176 to 250. So, then there is a newcomer investment where rising stars will get some cash, okay , this is great, this is good, it's probably not as good as it sounds when you read the press release just because most of the players are getting the winnings that are offered here, so if I go to the top 100 and the number for the top 100 is 300,000.

I'm going to click on you know someone who has had a borderline year in the top 100, but not that good, you know, a normal year, let's go with Jason Kubler, Jason Kubler this year has won the double, I mean, he's made 660 thousand dollars and he's 86 in the world and his record is 13 and 13 this year, so there won't be many guys in the top 100 that won't make three hundred thousand dollars when the year is all said and finished, now let's go to, let's go to the next pillar, what was it? I actually fixed it, so let's do this real quick, I think it's worth it, let's see, let's go to the world number, maybe 200, and see if they've gotten 75,000 in prize money, come on. to the world 200 because up to 250 you get seventy thousand dollars, have I heard of these vit copper Vive people?

I've heard about him, let's see how he is number 198 in the world right now, vitkopriva, he has earned 120,000 this. year, so I think what you'll find is that this won't really do much for the vast majority of players, but probably for injured players it will make a big difference and that's good, it's really good. because when you get injured you still deserve income, you still have to support the people around you, there are probably a lot of expenses that you still have to cover and I think it's really good that injured players get some relief. so they're doing at least something, uh, and by the way, even a lot of sponsorship deals, sponsorship deals, they have minimum matches played in the contract, so don't think that you get hurt and you're still collecting checks from your racket sponsor. and his clothing sponsor because that's not really how it works most of the time for the top guys yeah but most of the time that's not how it works so this is good but I would say it's even better as public relations movement.

For the ATP that in terms of helping the players, Jasper 547's next one was the best ending to the best of three sets. I'm curious what you think about this, although recency bias might play a role. I really rate it as one of the best. to the best of three finals, the end of the second set and the third really delivered. I love your analysis. I appreciate it and thanks for being a member, Jasper, you can hit the button to join. It's a contribution of two dollars a month to support the channel. I really appreciate the best of uh, the best three-set final ever seen, the famous ones, I think they are, uh, Djokovic, Djokovic Nadal in Madrid in 2009, you know you get a lot of complaints.

I think sometimes, though, when there's a number, when there's like a length and a match is really really long, it turns it into a layup, it's so easy to say, look, it's epic, it's one of the best ever. times, it's amazing and sometimes I think maybe we forget some of the best ones. Three matches that aren't very long and I think that applies to best of five sets as well, but because a lot of these best of five set matches are so historic, they stay with us for a lot longer and that's why it's so hard to remember.

These best three set finals, now the match of the year 2020 and that's why I love doing match analysis awards on Mondays after each season. It's a good way to keep track of these things and remember these things from the match of the year in 2020. It was the best of three sets match, it was Djokovic against Medvedev in the ATP Cup final, which was of incredible quality with a really great crowd and a lot of drama in the third set, so I think that was it. so good, 10 out of 10, one game plus and then that year in the majors, none of the major finals in 2020 were really great.

I mean, one of them was an incredibly memorable team over zverev at the US Open, but none of them were great matches. So at the end of the year, the best match was the ATP Cup. How about we go to Tenac? Hi Gail, do you think uh, hi Gill? Why do you think the US Open doesn't hold a live draw ceremony? Why aren't there more? transparency thanks for all the time and effort on your channel, you're welcome. Look, I worked for the US Open, but I'm not afraid to say I wish they did, and almost every tournament now, obviously some events will be broadcast live. draw ceremony and that's great, that's better, that's great, but I would go a step further, everyone is dropping the ball on the draws, the ATP, the four majors could do better.

I really think it should be a bigger business, it should be an entertainment product when the draw comes out and if there are any tournament directors or anyone in any kind of position of power who is listening to this or watching this they want to contact me so I can give them my feedback. ideas, feel free to go ahead and do that and I would be more than happy to participate or help in some way, but yeah, I just think if you can make it an event when the giveaway comes out and you can bring in information, analysis and experts at that time from an A from an official channel. at the same time you are revealing the giveaway and you can draw it and turn it into a product.

I think you have something there. I really know. There are a lot of things in sports that become entertainment products that may not be real. necessarily obvious opportunities to be like that, uh, the clearest comparison is the reveal of the NCAA tournament bracket, which is a huge deal for CBS every year, who's had the rights to that in the US, but even the drafts, the NBA draft, the NFL draft, the NBA draft. As you realize, they could just pick and tell us who picked each team, that doesn't need to be a TV show, but they've turned what is technically a managerial transaction which is selecting players, they've turned it into a TV show and it's huge. .

It's huge, the look of the draft maybe this maybe a tennis draw can never be like this, but especially if I'm the ATP and I can do it in every Masters 1000. I can make an entertainment product out of the draw. Reveal that I am absolutely one hundred percent doing that or the WTA, obviously the reason I didn't say the WTA right away is because they are so far away from investing in something like that, I mean all their digital media is so far behind the ATP, unfortunately, is fine, let's go. The next one is BVB forever.

I love your content. Almost everyone thinks that Djokovic will win a few more Slams, but in my opinion it is very likely that he will not be able to beat Alcaraz again next year. Alcaraz's development is so fast that it is almost impossible to win a slam without beating Alcaraz because of his dominance, what do you think about that? I think development rarely goes in a straight line and always stops at some point, so I completely understand your kind of I don't know. Get his general thought here, which is: wow, what falc garage keeps improving, eventually he'll beat everyone, no one can beat him and that'll be it, and in a way that's true if alcaraz continues to make improvements from where he is now if he has another season low productive and highly productive which, by the way, I think it was last year and I think it's much better in 2022 than it was, sorry, it's much, much better in 2023 than it was. in 2022 and I don't even think that was a given but it happened if he does that again next year you are right it will be a big deal and it will be the biggest factor as to how many more Djokovic. can ultimately win, so on those things I'm with you on all those things, you simply cannot assume that the development of Alcaraz is going to go in a straight line and you cannot assume or should actually assume that at some point it will will stabilize, I don't want to say it will stabilize permanently, but even if you look at Djokovic, Nadal andFederer, at a certain point they stopped being a rocket, they stopped improving at a fast and rapid pace.

He started to improve slowly and incrementally and the question is, when will that start to happen for Alcaraz? It could be very soon, we could already be there at that kind of time, uh, or you know, you're right, like this out of season if it comes out. and his serve is at the level of uh, you know, he goes up a couple points on his first serve or something, yeah, that would be significant. Next up is from Adam, this is in an Apple podcast review again, you can always leave the mail bag. questions about Apple podcasts and I appreciate it because it helps the Pod become more visible, okay, Adam says my question is I wanted to ask you why such an inconsistent chorich is born, you ask while beating Michael Moe on my screen television like, literally, that's a creepy moment, he just beat Michael Moen two hours and 48 minutes, that's a long time, it took a while.

I tend to blame Chorich's forehand, but what's a little strange is that he's a physical player, he's a consistent player. I really like him not only physically but also mentally and those types of players don't tend to have streaks, they tend to be very consistent but they strive to be the best and I'm surprised that Church doesn't adopt a profile that is a little more like that, I think When it comes to breaking into the top 10 and becoming a top player, offensive tools are really lacking. You know his backhand is his best shot, but we often see players whose backhand is the best shot they can be. a little limited offensively you don't want your backhand to be your best shot you want to have a very bad forehand It's telling that when I made my top 10 forehands, many people who didn't see the comment correctly thought I was hitting my top 10 forehands forehand in general because that is how good the forehand of all those who are in the top ten is, at least if it is not big, it is consistent like medadefs chorich is a kind of church that can hit big when he has a lot of time, but apart from Of that, it's just a problematic forehand, you think about a Cincinnati career, although I want to do that.

When he made that big run in Cincinnati, the number one thing we were looking at with George was his serve and the question was whether he was going to continue serving at this level because he was crushing the 130 ball. Big Time Ace rates well, the results they're here. First I'll read you your Ace rates. I'll tell you his Ace rate for 2023. It's 6.1 percent 6.1 here are his Ace rates in that run in Cincinnati 9.3 12.8 27.1 16. 12 and a half 9.7 so what's probably an average like double digit Ace rate of two average digits all over six every match over six, so I think the tournament will, to some extent, age as an event where the Born of Charge serve was put red hot and on a fast surface, which can mean quite a bit and that's why he was able to put together that incredible run in Cincinnati last year, by the way he's currently ranked 29th in the world and he's also been injured a lot, it should be mentioned below.

The following is from Roberto. Hello Gil, thanks for the excellent content, as always. I'm curious to hear your opinion on Ferrero's training. specifically on the frequency and level of detail of your instructions to Carlitos during a match and also how big you think their impact is, especially in moments where Carlos could be executing the wrong strategy and not see it right away or make a mistake. adjustment, I should clarify that this is not to obscure the fact, I'm just curious to know what you think, yes, there are probably some toxic aspects of this conversation that you know with people who really want to discredit Alcaraz, at the same time , some people just don't like training on the court and I totally understand that I don't like it either, but I think as long as it's legal, I think it should be made the most of and I'll never fall for it. a player or a coach for doing what they're allowed to do um, but the question you're asking here is a good one and better than the one I just mentioned, uh, what's the effect?

How much effect does it have? He has I think he is small but I think that small is big, you know this is a sport with small margins Alcaraz without Juan Carlos Ferrero in his box he is still an elite player and that will be demonstrated over the years we will have proof of it that because Juan Carlos Ferrero is not going to travel without Pérez 10 months a year there are going to be events where Alcarez says you can stay at home you can have a little break a little rest uh I will do this on my own and I think that this year that was in South America I will not I think Juan Carlos Ferrero was with alcaraz in South America when he won Buenos Aires and lost in the final in Rio and I don't think Juan Carlos Ferreira Ferreira was in Indian Wells I could be wrong, maybe I'm wrong, but I really don't think he was there when Al Caraz beat Medvedev and then I think he showed up and met with Carlitos in Miami, so let's see that. it's not it's not it's magical training what makes alcaraz who he is uh that said it's meaningful and useful otherwise alcaraz wouldn't do it to get someone's perspective and it shows incredible trust from alcaraz towards jcf uh alcaraz is ready to accept he's never vindictive or spiteful when it doesn't work out, as many players would be, it's the best case scenario for a coach and player relationship when it comes to building a system where you're actually getting the benefits of on-court training, um , is what I will say and I will also rule this out because I don't think it is thought about much and we have to be careful in tennis, where we are not.

We are still used to training being part of tennis, so we have to be very careful how we think about these things because we are not used to thinking about them at all, not everything that Juan Carlos Ferrero suggests will be good advice, that is not true. is. that has nothing to do with Ferrero that's how sports work it happens in every sport in the world your soccer coach doesn't always use the right tactics that doesn't mean they don't know the sport that doesn't mean that doesn't mean they're not helping your club in the bigger picture, hopefully if they are decent, it's true in all other sports.

That's okay, but not all advice will be gold dust. Keep that in mind, it's time to look at a couple more dpanels, this one will be quick. Hi Gill. I hear the term transition game. It is often used by commentators, but I have never heard a good definition. I'd love to hear your definition. Could you name some of them? players who excel at it and some who don't and why that's ok great question yeah if any of you have stuff like this I'm always happy to answer these things transition play refers to particularly in Individuals, how well do you take a short? the ball hits an approach shot and takes its first volley there is a particular footwork there is a particular art to making good approach shots and all of those things are taken into account when it comes to transition play and then ultimately how well you hit your volley, I think that's grouped together, but essentially it's how well you move within the court, hit the tennis ball and continue to move forward and position yourself for a volley, which is a very real technique that requires practice. and some are better than others shackles the best probably the best of all time at this um because of the way the term comes from the transition from Baseline to net, that's where the term comes from uh Angela, hey girl, thanks for posting content so revealing.

I have been a great help in getting a new tennis fan like myself up to speed with the nuances of the game. That's music to Myers. Question for you about Coco golf. What do you think your chances are at this upcoming US Open, given your recent success? Your expectations for your round in this particular tournament are to consider it a success. Thank you so much. He has made great strides here. I think the biggest things he's changed since bringing in Perry Riba and Brad Gilbert coming back for more gains in the game. It's a really important thing for someone who, first and foremost, does a good job of playing high and heavy and is also someone who defends incredibly well, so look, it's like, by returning it, you put it in its place to give yourself a fighting chance . and get back to the point instead of allowing your opponents to hit a lot of service winners, that doesn't make much sense for someone who is that fast, use that speed, get the return and play, use that speed, the other thing is I really love it . the way she hits her first serve when Coco first appeared and obviously I started watching her when she's 14 and playing Wimbledon.

I watch her hit serves 116 117. I'm thinking goodness when Coco Goth is 19 she's going to have by far the biggest serve in women's tennis. I'm just telling you that's what I thought back then. I made a mistake. That's not how it's developed so far, but I think she also got away from failing on serve, from serving flat and trying to produce as much speed as possible on the first serve, which is a mentality where you have to adopt that mentality, so between that adjustment on the return and that adjustment on the serve and then getting rid of the mental things on the forehand where she just wasn't sure of herself and didn't trust all three of those things, it makes her Playing the best tennis I've ever seen her play and I think she'll probably make it to the semi-finals.

I have to see the draw, but she would do it. I hope she makes it to the last weekend and, uh, I wouldn't let her win the tournament, I don't think, but she would make her go really deep since 1999, by Justin Jimmy Connors, why doesn't Jimmy Connors get it? Just the right amount of respect for his achievements in the tennis media. I think the media doesn't like Conor's personality, so he gets less shine than Mcenroe or Agassi, even though Connors has more professional accomplishments than either of them. A couple of reasons for this first one. After all, he's older than Mcenroe and Agassi and, that kind of distance, that moment when you forget a little, he hasn't been that involved in the world of tennis since his retirement, you know, since he created that tour for players retired that I think it was called the champions tour and that was a big problem, but since then he is content to be quite calm, you know, he likes golf, he lives in a beautiful place, Santa Barbara, California, and he is very happy To get that out of the public eye, I think he has a podcast with his son Brett Connors.

I recommend that it be great, Agassi, who wrote like the best book of all time, which was me. I also think he was crazy. sales and I think people who don't even watch tennis or don't care about tennis read Andre's book and then John Mcenroe, man, I mean, he obviously has things to comment on, but he's also just a rock star, beyond of that, he was the host of a Recently, I have never had a Netflix show in which he is very funny and I really enjoyed the show. I recommend it, so yeah, Jimmy, it's just that it was a little bit longer ago and it doesn't have the kind of multimedia visibility that I think Agassi and uh.

Mcenroe had it and again Sampras was more recent and got the record, that's how I would break it down, but I think it's good, one of the reasons I wanted to get to the comment is because I think it's good to remember the immense achievements of Jimmy Connors. The next one is from Lizzy. Do you think wild cards for Venus Williams? Wozniakyan Isner is fair for young and promising players who earn quite good income and can generate quite good income. Can we completely eliminate the wildcards and make everyone qualify? What is your opinion? I hear a lot of people say who deserves wild cards and who doesn't, no one deserves wild cards, that's the point of a wild card, you didn't qualify on merit. but we want you in the tournament so no one deserves them, but how do you decide who gets them?

If you're going to do that, let's do it for the fans, baby, the fans certainly want to see Wozniacki, Venus Williams and John Isner, and they are. They are going to fill seats and people are going to go to the US Open and I think that of the three Venus is probably the least competitive, people are going to go to the US Open and Venus Williams is going to be booked by Louis Armstrong. and they will be people who will see Venus and say let's go to Armstrong to see Venus and they will have a smile on their face and they will go home happy that day knowing that they saw Venus Williams I'm not going to complain about that, that'll do it.

The giveaway will go out tomorrow Thursday and then I'll get to work on that preview. I can't wait for that. Make sure you stay tuned, I hope you enjoy it. Don't forget to subscribe see you next time