|
Post by dunninla3 on May 20, 2019 13:44:25 GMT -5
Feel like we are just gonna start seeing small ball where two dudes that can side out super effectively go for it rather than dealing with athletically shaky blockers who are inconsistent setters and passers lol. I bet if Vaught and someone who sides out well and jump serves on the left (like Dalanhese) teamed up they could get through without a lot of problems. So many points bled to bad passes and bad sets that a clean side out with a few great serves should be more than enough to make up for little to no block Even if you are great at siding out you still need a way to score, so yeah, have a team that can fire away from the baseline. Look at Gabe and Paul beating Jake and Tayor, they really went after them serving. I'd like to see Phil and Nick do that too. They aren't scoring enough points by blocking and defense vs. their side out game right now against great teams. They need to force these teams into tough out of system plays. Take the Field/Bomgren vs. Casebeer/Chaim match. Troy and Tim didn't serve hard, and missed a ton, so the serves they got in were quite easy for J&C to stay in system, and they destroyed them. I have noticed that too. You either have to have a great block, or killer serving, but if you have neither... fugedaboutit. why bother? Which makes me wonder, given the US has NO young blockers anywhere near Phil in his prime or Mol now, why we don't concentrate on tough bombs away serving, or tough jump floats. I see way to many "just put the ball in play" serves. And to throw salt in the wound, way to many of those just put it in play serves are served OUT! How does that make any sense? Fish or cut bait. That is pure mediocrity and will lead to the US falling off the map after Phil (great serving) and Jake (really good serving) retire. No matter who you put Taylor with at that point won't make up for an inability to score real points.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on May 20, 2019 13:49:50 GMT -5
Even if you are great at siding out you still need a way to score, so yeah, have a team that can fire away from the baseline. Look at Gabe and Paul beating Jake and Tayor, they really went after them serving. I'd like to see Phil and Nick do that too. They aren't scoring enough points by blocking and defense vs. their side out game right now against great teams. They need to force these teams into tough out of system plays. Take the Field/Bomgren vs. Casebeer/Chaim match. Troy and Tim didn't serve hard, and missed a ton, so the serves they got in were quite easy for J&C to stay in system, and they destroyed them. I have noticed that too. You either have to have a great block, or killer serving, but if you have neither... fugedaboutit. why bother? Which makes me wonder, given the US has NO young blockers anywhere near Phil in his prime or Mol now, why we don't concentrate on tough bombs away sets, or tough jump floats. I see way to many "just put the ball in play" serves. That is pure mediocrity. Drives me carzy watching Phil and Nick do that. Maybe Paul and Gabe's win may change some people's thinking?? I thought Jeremy and Reid where that team. Tri and Trevor could be that team.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on May 20, 2019 13:55:24 GMT -5
Drives me carzy watching Phil and Nick do that. Maybe Paul and Gabe's win may change some people's thinking?? I thought Jeremy and Reid where that team. Tri and Trevor could be that team. To me Jeremy has done the right thing. It's just a question of too many hitting mistakes. If Jeremy didn't have that serve, they might not even be an MD team. So why doesn't Chaim bomb away? He has the talent, he just needs to step it up like Jeremy did.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on May 20, 2019 14:10:10 GMT -5
Drives me carzy watching Phil and Nick do that. Maybe Paul and Gabe's win may change some people's thinking?? I thought Jeremy and Reid where that team. Tri and Trevor could be that team. To me Jeremy has done the right thing. It's just a question of too many hitting mistakes. If Jeremy didn't have that serve, they might not even be an MD team. So why doesn't Chaim bomb away? He has the talent, he just needs to step it up like Jeremy did. Last year Chaim played with a player with one of the worst serves on tour, who doesnt block as well as Jeremy and whose sideout game is roughly the same level. Not only were they not qualifiers, they made a final
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on May 20, 2019 14:12:11 GMT -5
I have noticed that too. You either have to have a great block, or killer serving, but if you have neither... fugedaboutit. why bother? Which makes me wonder, given the US has NO young blockers anywhere near Phil in his prime or Mol now, why we don't concentrate on tough bombs away sets, or tough jump floats. I see way to many "just put the ball in play" serves. That is pure mediocrity. Drives me carzy watching Phil and Nick do that. Maybe Paul and Gabe's win may change some people's thinking?? I thought Jeremy and Reid where that team. Tri and Trevor could be that team. Paul and Gabe's win was a great thing, but it was just a fluke. The Hanneman/Cardenas of our time. Their scores against Adam Roberts and Skylar are indicative of who that team are, just as the victories tell us who Gibb/Crabb are
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on May 20, 2019 14:22:48 GMT -5
Drives me carzy watching Phil and Nick do that. Maybe Paul and Gabe's win may change some people's thinking?? I thought Jeremy and Reid where that team. Tri and Trevor could be that team. Paul and Gabe's win was a great thing, but it was just a fluke. The Hanneman/Cardenas of our time. Their scores against Adam Roberts and Skylar are indicative of who that team are, just as the victories tell us who Gibb/Crabb are It was just one team that played a full match at their peak. Yes, fluke-y, but those can happen. I think both Paul and Gabe got a lot better this weekend, and may have been able to win another if not so gassed in their 3rd day. The Robert's match, the scores look like a team adjusting to a 6'9 player in the 1st set, and then once figured out, took care of business. But it's probably somewhere in between. Through the Q and MD, they did not play a seed worse than theirs after their 1st match. They won 4 in a row, all as underdogs.
|
|
|
Post by 405LAX on May 20, 2019 15:24:24 GMT -5
Paul and Gabe's win was a great thing, but it was just a fluke. The Hanneman/Cardenas of our time. Their scores against Adam Roberts and Skylar are indicative of who that team are, just as the victories tell us who Gibb/Crabb are It was just one team that played a full match at their peak. Yes, fluke-y, but those can happen. I think both Paul and Gabe got a lot better this weekend, and may have been able to win another if not so gassed in their 3rd day. The Robert's match, the scores look like a team adjusting to a 6'9 player in the 1st set, and then once figured out, took care of business. But it's probably somewhere in between. Through the Q and MD, they did not play a seed worse than theirs after their 1st match. They won 4 in a row, all as underdogs. Roberts is consistently mediocre, thank the high heavens he didn't qualify versus Gabriel who has the sheer physicality to be a MD player. <iframe width="23.860000000000127" height="8.879999999999995" style="position: absolute; width: 23.860000000000127px; height: 8.879999999999995px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_94702609" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="23.860000000000127" height="8.879999999999995" style="position: absolute; width: 23.86px; height: 8.88px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1133px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_13052988" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="23.860000000000127" height="8.879999999999995" style="position: absolute; width: 23.86px; height: 8.88px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 380px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_98037268" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="23.860000000000127" height="8.879999999999995" style="position: absolute; width: 23.86px; height: 8.88px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1133px; top: 380px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_27294261" scrolling="no"></iframe>
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on May 20, 2019 15:24:56 GMT -5
To me Jeremy has done the right thing. It's just a question of too many hitting mistakes. If Jeremy didn't have that serve, they might not even be an MD team. So why doesn't Chaim bomb away? He has the talent, he just needs to step it up like Jeremy did. Last year Chaim played with a player with one of the worst serves on tour, who doesnt block as well as Jeremy and whose sideout game is roughly the same level. Not only were they not qualifiers, they made a final I am not privy to stats, which is really what these theoretical discussions need to be pinned to. But using just reasoning, It doesn't really address my issue to cite what Chaim did with another partner. My argument applies to any player, man or woman. Just to be clear, and this argument also applies to tennis -- the serve is the only critical skill that doesn't depend on, nor is it linked to any other skill in the game. It can be practiced in a vacuum. There is no a priori reason that a player cannot develop a dangerous serve, other than lack of skill. Look, little John McEnroe developed his own dangerous serve using skill even though he didn't have strength or height. He would not have won half the great games he won if he did not have a dangerous serve. Speaking of beach, other than opponent hitting mistakes or fouls, real points only come from three things: 1) blocking, 2) Service aces, 3) digging and putting the transition away. And that doesn't count serving pressure that puts the opponent out of system. For every real point off an ace, I'll bet two points come from service pressure putting the opponent out of system and into mistakes. So, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why "just put it in play" serving would ever be tolerated from any player. On the international scene, if the US teams are not going to be able to count on intimidating blocking a la early Phil, Alison, Mol, etc. then why not focus on developing dangerous serves? Not just bombs away, but short corner, short middle, painting the sidelines? To just bop it over and not even try just makes no sense to me. Even an old school Singin skyball would be much better than a social beach serve.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on May 20, 2019 15:26:10 GMT -5
It was just one team that played a full match at their peak. Yes, fluke-y, but those can happen. I think both Paul and Gabe got a lot better this weekend, and may have been able to win another if not so gassed in their 3rd day. The Robert's match, the scores look like a team adjusting to a 6'9 player in the 1st set, and then once figured out, took care of business. But it's probably somewhere in between. Through the Q and MD, they did not play a seed worse than theirs after their 1st match. They won 4 in a row, all as underdogs. Roberts is consistently mediocre, thank the high heavens he didn't qualify versus Gabriel who has the sheer physicality to be a MD player. Gabe's siding out against Jake was surely a big plus. Like G2 implied, let's see him do it again.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on May 20, 2019 15:31:23 GMT -5
Last year Chaim played with a player with one of the worst serves on tour, who doesnt block as well as Jeremy and whose sideout game is roughly the same level. Not only were they not qualifiers, they made a final I am not privy to stats, which is really what these theoretical discussions need to be pinned to. But using just reasoning, It doesn't really address my issue to cite what Chaim did with another partner. My argument applies to any player, man or woman. Just to be clear, and this argument also applies to tennis -- the serve is the only critical skill that doesn't depend on, nor is it linked to any other skill in the game. It can be practiced in a vacuum. There is no a priori reason that a player cannot develop a dangerous serve, other than lack of skill. Look, little John McEnroe developed his own dangerous serve using skill even though he didn't have strength or height. He would not have won half the great games he won if he did not have a dangerous serve. Speaking of beach, other than opponent hitting mistakes or fouls, real points only come from three things: 1) blocking, 2) Service aces, 3) digging and putting the transition away. And that doesn't count serving pressure that puts the opponent out of system. For every real point off an ace, I'll bet two points come from service pressure putting the opponent out of system and into mistakes. So, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why "just put it in play" serving would ever be tolerated from any player. On the international scene, if the US teams are not going to be able to count on intimidating blocking a la early Phil, Alison, Mol, etc. then why not focus on developing dangerous serves? Not just bombs away, but short corner, short middle, painting the sidelines? To just bop it over and not even try just makes no sense to me. Even an old school Singin skyball would be much better than a social beach serve. When Phil was clearly the biggest beast in the sand, I get the put it in play, service errors take away from real scoring chances. But He isn't probably in the top 5 in height on the tour right now. Players like Taylor are so good in system, take them out and their % goes down.
|
|
|
Post by 405LAX on May 20, 2019 15:31:40 GMT -5
Chaim doesn't get nearly enough credit for his jump and overall length, when he gets up to hit, he's elevated past most blockers on tour.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on May 20, 2019 15:41:53 GMT -5
Chaim doesn't get nearly enough credit for his jump and overall length, when he gets up to hit, he's elevated past most blockers on tour. You're right. I may discount him a bit after he and Ricardo's start to last year.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on May 20, 2019 15:47:42 GMT -5
Chaim doesn't get nearly enough credit for his jump and overall length, when he gets up to hit, he's elevated past most blockers on tour. I think the players give him credit... Jeremy gets most of the serves. This weekend his sideout game was at the highest level.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on May 20, 2019 15:52:44 GMT -5
Last year Chaim played with a player with one of the worst serves on tour, who doesnt block as well as Jeremy and whose sideout game is roughly the same level. Not only were they not qualifiers, they made a final I am not privy to stats, which is really what these theoretical discussions need to be pinned to. But using just reasoning, It doesn't really address my issue to cite what Chaim did with another partner. My argument applies to any player, man or woman. Just to be clear, and this argument also applies to tennis -- the serve is the only critical skill that doesn't depend on, nor is it linked to any other skill in the game. It can be practiced in a vacuum. There is no a priori reason that a player cannot develop a dangerous serve, other than lack of skill. Look, little John McEnroe developed his own dangerous serve using skill even though he didn't have strength or height. He would not have won half the great games he won if he did not have a dangerous serve. Speaking of beach, other than opponent hitting mistakes or fouls, real points only come from three things: 1) blocking, 2) Service aces, 3) digging and putting the transition away. And that doesn't count serving pressure that puts the opponent out of system. For every real point off an ace, I'll bet two points come from service pressure putting the opponent out of system and into mistakes. So, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why "just put it in play" serving would ever be tolerated from any player. On the international scene, if the US teams are not going to be able to count on intimidating blocking a la early Phil, Alison, Mol, etc. then why not focus on developing dangerous serves? Not just bombs away, but short corner, short middle, painting the sidelines? To just bop it over and not even try just makes no sense to me. Even an old school Singin skyball would be much better than a social beach serve. I'm not disputing you vis a vis the value of serving, I was taking issue with the preposterous assertion that without Jeremy's big serve they would be qualifier level. For that, Chaims run with Tim is not just relevant it's dispositive
|
|
|
Post by 405LAX on May 20, 2019 16:22:24 GMT -5
I am not privy to stats, which is really what these theoretical discussions need to be pinned to. But using just reasoning, It doesn't really address my issue to cite what Chaim did with another partner. My argument applies to any player, man or woman. Just to be clear, and this argument also applies to tennis -- the serve is the only critical skill that doesn't depend on, nor is it linked to any other skill in the game. It can be practiced in a vacuum. There is no a priori reason that a player cannot develop a dangerous serve, other than lack of skill. Look, little John McEnroe developed his own dangerous serve using skill even though he didn't have strength or height. He would not have won half the great games he won if he did not have a dangerous serve. Speaking of beach, other than opponent hitting mistakes or fouls, real points only come from three things: 1) blocking, 2) Service aces, 3) digging and putting the transition away. And that doesn't count serving pressure that puts the opponent out of system. For every real point off an ace, I'll bet two points come from service pressure putting the opponent out of system and into mistakes. So, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why "just put it in play" serving would ever be tolerated from any player. On the international scene, if the US teams are not going to be able to count on intimidating blocking a la early Phil, Alison, Mol, etc. then why not focus on developing dangerous serves? Not just bombs away, but short corner, short middle, painting the sidelines? To just bop it over and not even try just makes no sense to me. Even an old school Singin skyball would be much better than a social beach serve. I'm not disputing you vis a vis the value of serving, I was taking issue with the preposterous assertion that without Jeremy's big serve they would be qualifier level. For that, Chaims run with Tim is not just relevant it's dispositive Jeremy's overall speed and physicality make him a MD player, take his bombs away serving out of it.
|
|