Yep I am, If it wasnât then Isner, Cilic and few other big servers would have won. How long did it take for Ivanisevic to win Wimbledon?
What you are implying that all you need is a big serve to win Wimbledon which is not the case? Yes you need a good serve but you need that on any surface, if you didnât then everyone would be serving under hand.
Federer and Sampras are probably two of the greatest servers in the game, that is why a lot of these players didnât win. It is notable that they surface they all excelled on is Grass. You donât seem to be able to separate the obvious correlation between a big serve and success on grass. If youâve a big serve you will go a very long way on grass.
Itâs the most important thing you need on grass.
It is the most important shot you need in the game. If ya cant serve you wont win. Doesnât matter who the fuck you are, if you have a weak serve you wont win on any surface.
Itâs the most important shot you need on grass.
Itâs important on hard too but a serve alone wonât carry you on hard surfaces like it will on grass.
Itâs not of great importance on clay.
So if it is the most important shot in tennis then howcome John Isner has never got past the 3rd round at Wimbledon in his career? Infact he has gone further in the French open where you say the serve is not important than he has at Wimbledon.
Itâs not.
Itâs the most important shot you need on grass.
You really dont have a clue. If you have a shit serve in tennis you are fucked. Simple as that.
Who did EPO Nadal draw in the first round?
Nadal has pulled out due to cramp in his little finger
Iâm not on about a shit serve.
I am saying a big serve is absolutely vital in grass court tennis.
It is important to hard court tennis but not to the extent it is on grass.
On clay a big serve is not of great importance. Itâs why the likes of Sampras and Federer had minimal impact on clay, both their games feed off their serve, when that is negated then it changes matters. Conversely Nadal is not a big server so is at a disadvantage of grass.
To win a grass court title without having a big serve is an absolutely remarkable feat like Agassi did in 1992.
Better off. Let this to the big boys.
@Cicero_Dandi relying on John Isner and Ivo Karlovic to back up his proposition that all you need at the Championship to prosper is a big serve. Heâs refusing now to deal with the reality of the record of Isner and Karlovic at the Championship when the actual facts were put to him.
Youâre not dealing with the facts on Karlovic.
His best career performance is Wimbledon, the only slam he has made it to a QF in.
3 of his 8 career titles have been on grass despite grass being by the shortest tour of the calendar year by a considerable distance, lasting just 6 weeks and played in handful of countires - niche tennis that Karlovic excels in.
Karlovic, is he taking the piss.
A big serving donkey who excels on grass.
I think youâre taking the piss when youâre putting grass tennis on a pedestal when Karlovic is a type of guy who excels on it.
Tell me then how Murray who has the shittest serve of all the top players in top 20 has won wimbledon twice?
Well thatâs just a blatant lie.
Murray has a bigger serve than Nadal for starters. Do you even know anything about tennis?
The weakest part of Murrays game has been his serve. Always has.
Yet he is 24th in the all time Aces list.
Nadal is 78th.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/aces
Murray has a much bigger serve than Nadal. That is of far more value on grass courts.
Nadal 3,110 aces in 1,065 matches
Murray 5,472 aces in 806 matches
Are you going to stop spoofing now?