|
Post by janie on Jun 14, 2008 8:51:12 GMT -5
Stop trying to boss us around. I'm no Nicole fan, but I still feel bad about what she's going through, whatever it is. There's nothing wrong with me saying in her thread. I wish some intrepid journalist would take the trouble to find out what her problem is. Sheesh, how hard is it to ask around, to probe a little bit? The whole thing is too strange -- and maybe, but maybe not, sad -- to just ignore.
|
|
|
Post by corswandt on Jun 14, 2008 12:30:43 GMT -5
Law of demand - nobody bothers to investigate because nobody would care. I mean, did anyone try to find out why Bardina, a far from talentless player (she was something of a pocket A-Bond) who was ranked #62 at the time, suddenly decided to stop playing tennis after a 7-match loss streak?
Plus there's no great mystery. Hopeful hyped for years as a certain multiple GS winner suddenly realizes that #15-25 and the odd Slam QF (if given a good draw) is all she can hope for. Decides she's above that and quits.
|
|
|
Post by janie on Jun 14, 2008 19:20:27 GMT -5
That doesn't make any sense. Most kids just assume they can keep improving. They know that not too many players peak at age 17 or 18 like Hingis or Kourni and then go downhill -- actually, Kournikova probably peaked at 16. But even those two probably kept thinking they'd get better.
I'm mystified by Vaidisova's descent and am just waiting for the Capriati-esque drug arrest and mug shot!
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Jun 14, 2008 19:59:29 GMT -5
I don't think it's that. She has defeated Jankovic this year, and indoors last fall. So, she can beat the top players if things go her way.
I just don't think the desire is there. There can be many reasons for that. We know Nikki is a different cat from most the dumb jocks on tour.
|
|
|
Post by R. Black on Jun 14, 2008 21:51:57 GMT -5
It amazes me to no end that someone with footwork such as hers made it to the top 10. Why? You don't need to move to beat most players. Venus was walking on one leg against... Kremer I think, and still managed to win.
|
|
|
Post by corswandt on Jun 15, 2008 11:22:12 GMT -5
That doesn't make any sense. Most kids just assume they can keep improving. They know that not too many players peak at age 17 or 18 like Hingis or Kourni and then go downhill -- actually, Kournikova probably peaked at 16. But even those two probably kept thinking they'd get better. You could see she had worked hard on her game when she showed up in last year's fall indoor season, and had achieved some minor improvements here and there. But the problems remained: nonexistent return game (couldn't break Pennetta at Linz), messy BH, appalling footwork - and the outcome was the same as always: playing far too many tight matches and losing most of them. She was clearly doing her best to improve, and still going nowhere. I don't think it's that. She has defeated Jankovic this year, and indoors last fall. So, she can beat the top players if things go her way. I remember the Sydney match. Riveting, but Nicole's return was the worst it had ever been. Jankovic closed most of her service games at 15 or even at love. Next round she meets her bĂȘte noire Kuznetsova and it's back to square one. Lousy return, bossing Sveta around only to end up overhitting FHs in all the points that mattered, bad luck (had two SPs in one of the sets, Sveta saves one of them after a shank that floated right to the line). I just don't think the desire is there. There can be many reasons for that. We know Nikki is a different cat from most the dumb jocks on tour. In what sense? IIRC we've already talked about this, and I said I thought she was headstrong, but in the tomboy rather than the diva sense. Re: dumb jocks, I know that being really stupid can help with ignoring pressure (e.g. Ivanovic, the sisters), but again I see no evidence that Nicole is any smarter than her competition.
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Jun 15, 2008 11:47:25 GMT -5
Nikki's into reading war novels and is a movie expert. And hearts an ugly, crazy man 10 years her elder. She screams the nerdy, "I act older than my age" type. Which doesn't necessarily mean she's smarter, but she has different desires in life.
She's attempted to be sold as the next Mariabot. Nikki has already made a few million, so why keep doing that?
The limitations of her game also probably were a factor, although I don't completely agree with that. If BAG can be #1, then Nikki can get quite high as well.
|
|
|
Post by corswandt on Jun 15, 2008 12:32:58 GMT -5
The limitations of her game also probably were a factor, although I don't completely agree with that. If BAG can be #1, then Nikki can get quite high as well. You have to look closely, but the differences are there: BAG has a considerably bigger game, and that allows her to finish off points without taking that many risks. Her game consists of hitting as hard as possible without ever aiming too close to the lines - against scrubs, she often hits straight down the middle. Nicole had to play a more high risk game, had to hit deeper and closer to the lines all the time. And she did that while standing deep behind the baseline because her wide swings forced her to take the ball late - this meant that the overall effectiveness of her ground game was nowhere near the quality of her hitting. Plus BAG is a top competitor of a type we have never seen before: utterly unflappable instead of frenzied. The fist pumping and "ajdes" are staged to intimidate her opponents. As for personality, nerdiness, yes, but not maturity. She has thrown away a career countless others would kill to have.
|
|
|
Post by GoDom on Jun 15, 2008 12:50:29 GMT -5
I remember watching an interview with her about 3 or 4 years ago. I was amazed at how mature she sounded there, like she was in her early 20's or so. This is in line with Leena's view.
On the court she never displayed any maturity, so I don't know. What did she expect from her tennis career? Maybe she realised that this is not what she wants to do.
|
|
|
Post by Pamela Shriver on Feb 19, 2009 13:28:05 GMT -5
Niki has apparently taken her stepdad back as her coach.
|
|
|
Post by Iorix on Feb 22, 2009 7:16:43 GMT -5
Niki has apparently taken her stepdad back as her coach.
|
|
|
Post by leelee on Mar 1, 2009 22:13:46 GMT -5
TTC keeps showing Nikki's "No Strings" show, and I get sad. Why did she have to get terrible when I finally realized how awesome she was.
|
|
|
Post by Pamela Shriver on Mar 1, 2009 22:36:14 GMT -5
I understand. By the time I finally started enjoying Niki, she was starting to get pretty bad.
Niki still has a slam QF on her ranking, and she's ranked #69. That's not good.
|
|
|
Post by DBBN on Mar 2, 2009 6:29:14 GMT -5
Niki still has a slam QF on her ranking, and she's ranked # 80.
|
|
|
Post by lexpretend on Mar 2, 2009 8:33:02 GMT -5
Coincidentally, the No 81 player (Dokic) also has a Slam QF on her record.
|
|
|
Post by DBBN on Mar 2, 2009 9:51:30 GMT -5
Something really weird is going to happen this year, I can feel it. Like armageddon, or Schnyder winning a Slam.
|
|
|
Post by Iorix on Mar 25, 2009 18:27:24 GMT -5
I think I finally got it.
"Deadisova" because you pronounce "Veddysova".
|
|
|
Post by Grarliner on Apr 5, 2009 1:27:25 GMT -5
Hey, she won a few matches in IW and Miami. Not as dead!
|
|
|
Post by Old Hag on Jan 27, 2012 14:00:19 GMT -5
And yet SF QF QF at the Slams. I don't know if I'd complain, if I were you. Let's complain.
|
|
|
Post by lexpretend on Feb 4, 2012 4:40:42 GMT -5
Plus BAG is a top competitor of a type we have never seen before: utterly unflappable instead of frenzied. Funny to read this now. It was true at the time, too.
|
|
|
Post by Grarliner on Jul 25, 2012 14:17:50 GMT -5
The limitations of her game also probably were a factor, although I don't completely agree with that. If BAG can be #1, then Nikki can get quite high as well. You have to look closely, but the differences are there: BAG has a considerably bigger game, and that allows her to finish off points without taking that many risks. Her game consists of hitting as hard as possible without ever aiming too close to the lines - against scrubs, she often hits straight down the middle. Nicole had to play a more high risk game, had to hit deeper and closer to the lines all the time. And she did that while standing deep behind the baseline because her wide swings forced her to take the ball late - this meant that the overall effectiveness of her ground game was nowhere near the quality of her hitting. Plus BAG is a top competitor of a type we have never seen before: utterly unflappable instead of frenzied. The fist pumping and "ajdes" are staged to intimidate her opponents. As for personality, nerdiness, yes, but not maturity. She has thrown away a career countless others would kill to have. I don't wish to dredge up old quotes and laugh, but do you still feel that way about Ana?
|
|
|
Post by Grarliner on Jul 25, 2012 14:18:33 GMT -5
Oh lol! Lex, you already did the dredging!
|
|