Some totally misunderstood comments I posted in my FaceBook page
regarding the QuarterFinal US Open tennis match between chilean
Fernando Gonzalez & spanish Rafael Nadal. I also drew parallels to
spanish Barcelona mega soccer team, enlarging the subject to sports
in general ---{"... Fernando Gonzalez, at the US Open -Grand Slam
Tennis- you earned my full respect; no one wants machine-monsters,
we all like real human beings PLAYING a GAME. They've turned
sports into a War, and that's a crying shame...". "... Tennis & Soccer
have been cajoled into spectacles of "super tough" machine monsters.
Federer & Nadal "play" like Gladiators for their lives, and Barcelona
plays every ball like it's the Mayan's to-the-death old game. They
have lost their minds, man... Gonzalez was showing-off being
HUMAN, for a change...". "...As for Leo Messi, go back to your
Barcelona matrix team...!?..."}---.
For ex. a TV commentator in the following days SemiFinal between
Federer & Djokovic, complained that people who bicker about tennis
having been twisted into a "banger" frenzy, should remember same
was said about the late great Kramer -already in the '50's...!?-. But
that is not what I implied, at all; I will elaborate here, what I meant.
I might be a musician, a wanna-be philosopher, a former architect,
and decidedly a fringe wisdom seeker & esotericist, but that doesn't
mean I do not really comprehend sports, because I do have a keen
vision of both Tennis & Soccer -mainly because when I grew up
there was not much to do in my small town, 'cept watching the tv
tennis & soccer broadcasts-.
Before I opted for architecture, I did the same engineering campus
as Manuel Pellegrini -the current coach of Real Madrid-, although
he was like 6 years ahead of me, and besides being in a few parties
together, I never exchanged any soccer ideas with him (who at the
time was a central defender position soccer player of a prof. team,
at the same time he was studying engineering...!?). Maybe he saw
me sing a few times at university festivals & such, at best; that's it
for me & "Manolo" or "Pele", as he was called back then (currently
nicknamed "El Ingeniero", a term coined by the argentinian press).
As for Tennis, I never exchanged any inputs on the sport with any
luminaries, besides skying & partying together with the great Hans
Gildemeister for 2 weeks one winter in '85 or '86, when he was No.
12 in the world; Hans had just returned from Europe -having lost
to John McEnroe-, and when I was playing at the bar in the lovely
Portillo ski-resort, he sat really close to the 'stage' and later told me
I did some incredibly-accurate Neil Young, adding he had just seen
him in concert before returning. So we used to carry beers inside our
jackets as we ski'd the slopes of Portillo together & such innocent
mayhem as that, all 'very-proper' good old times partying on the
part of 2 german descendants.
Thing is, I took up the racket in '76 at 18 years of age (hardly the
early beginner), just for kicks; nevertheless, I had some fairly well
established -and quite surprising- avantgarde ideas about tennis,
which I was intent on "proving" in the court, as feasible. First of all
I considered tennis to be a POWER GAME, contrary to the then
prevailing view of the sport as a "Triple/Top-Spin & Slice" modus
operandi, bent on being tricky, laying crafty traps on the opponent,
mostly related to the soft treatment of the ball.
I used to call that "faggotty tennis" (my apologies to the gay crowd),
and I sensed this approach would robotize tennis, as way too much
emphasis was placed in DEFENSIVE TENNIS. The concept of "Wall"
player, who returns absolutely everything to perfection, was what I
despised the most -even the great Bjorn Borg was not my hero for
this very reason-. My hero of course, was Jimmy Connors.
I've never owned a racket, but I borrowed a Kramer for the 1st. time;
the malleable nature of the wood frame instantly bothered me. I then
looked around & borrowed a beaten up Wilson metallic racket, that
was much better in my opinion. Thus I went metallic from the get-go;
however the metal had its problems, and I started seeking graphite.
This an interesting story, because I instantly decided that the radius
of the ellipse of the old rackets was Way-Too-Small, and that tennis
rackets should be much much bigger, and was I right or was I right?
The reason for this, that "banger" tennis needs a much larger radius
of strings to hit the ball -I was constantly hitting the frame-; should
I add I started hitting the ball at maximum speed from the very start?
Nope, you already guessed that. Pretty soon I was practicing at
speeds almost professional level, even though I was just a beginner...!?
Naturally everyone thought I was plain crazy, they all told me I had
to really slow down many notches, but I kept thinking that my theory
of tennis was 'more right', now that I could confirm it on court. First
of all I considered the BODY POSTURE of a straight-ahead "banger",
a much more natural posture, it just seemed totally natural to try
to hit the ball at the maximum speed possible, preferaby focusing
on hitting flat, rather than top-spin. I instantly discovered that you
needed a 2-hand Backhand to play this tennis (i.e. like Connors), that
this was natural, not just a Connors-crazy thing.
Let me tell you, practicing this type of tennis in '76, was something
akin to being a loonie. HOWEVER I CLEARLY SAW THIS WAS THE
FUTURE OF TENNIS...! I developed the idea that all those spinners
in the soft mode, were already Has-Been's, that history would out-
play them. And that is exactly what happened, as time went by.
So it was sheer Synchronicity that I would meet Hans Gildemeister,
who was probably the "1st. major banger" of them all; the fact that
I could share another sports with him -skying-, was like confirming
my being right all along; I was not a pro-tennis player, but I felt this
was 'like' playing it -by triangulation, if you know what I mean-, in an
almost poetic statement to the matter. Now I was a musician, singing
professionally for the 1st. time in Portillo (for the whole seasons); and
Hans was there, what a great 'transference' of sorts (unfortunately I
was playing a cheap & crappy Epiphone 12-string, through an even
crappier old Peavey PA). When Gildemeister sometimes would beat
Bjorn Borg, this was to me like the ultimate proof of my theory; I just
kept thinking "This is gonna get harder & harder, faster & faster".
Like it indeed, did.
See, when you hit really hard & flat, you can actually PLAY INSANELY
WAY BEHIND THE BASE-LINE, from that far distance back you can
play aggressive tennis, and even phenomenal winning shots. Thus by
extending the "Range of Depth" to seemingly any distance, another
game was possible, you could catch balls almost at ground level even,
and play them back for win -not simply a sissy return-. Conversely
you could change your position drastically playing almost on top of
the base-line and hit the ball as hard-as-you-could RIGHT OFF THE
BOUNCE, very high in the air. This duality afforded you incredible
range and variety, always being on the aggressive side, playing "win",
not just sissy/defensive or "repetitive" tennis. Once I went to see
Guillermo Vilas practicing -standing right next to the side lines, very
up close to him-and I could so clearly see that all that spin craze just
led to to unnatural Body Postures and such; Vilas was so good at it,
because he had enormous muscles, Popeye doing tennis basically.
Quickly I also discovered that you could not efficiently do this if you
were a short guy like me, to excel you needed to be much taller; when
you added a killer serve -and why not, some nice volley capabilities-
in my opinion, this was "it", this was the future of tennis, period. And
that is exactly what happened, Serves became insanely strong as well,
as time went by. All this I thought of as the dramatic changes in
tennis playing, that would forever take the throne away from those
prevalent defensive players, and their myriad of Cat & Mouse crafty
tactics.
However another generation of players would arise, combining both
the "Crafty-Tricky" old defensive game, with the new 'banger' mode.
This twin-mode of "Spinners & Bangers In-1", would takeover tennis,
and most notably Federer & later Nadal would epitomize such. They
seem to be aggressive, but in essence they are defensive players;
only adding the risky-bang in those crucial moments; for the most
part, their banging is really hard, yet of a "Repetitive-Defensive"
nature, and Federer for ex even goes to the 100% neutral defensive
Slice, most often than any player I've known.
This type of tennis revived the old stinky "Cat & Mouse" tactics, at
the same time proving to be of decidedly MACHINE LIKE behaviour
or ROBOTIC tennis; and it became the ultimate "Total Efficiency"
icon. It is based in exploiting the opponents weakness, capitalizing
mostly on their own mistakes, and by burying them under a wall
of repetitive banging. Federer was the most "Genius-Creative"
style of this lot, but still for the most part the emblem for the total
nightmare opponent. Like putting Bjorn Borg in the body of a total
"banger".
However this to me is selling tennis short, in exchange for winning
a lot of tournaments; to me, for ex. the way Martin Del Potro has
begun to play, is much closer to what I had envisioned, because it
is straight-forward no bull/no tricks tennis, focused on YOUR own
playing, rather than the opponent's weaknesses. And most often
this weakness is of a PSYCHOLOGICAL NATURE, this the part
that sucketh most..!?
One begins to wonder: who's got the better Hypnotist...? That's the
one that will end up winning. Thus this sucks Big-Time Pig-Time,
period. This drone-repetitive, tricky-crafty, super-efficient machine
like tennis, more akin to a Vampire strategy than anything else.
Players with a blank hypnotic stare in their eyes, responding to the
most impossible balls, doing the super-human.
So there you had a hard-trying Fernando Gonzalez, playing the
US Open QuarterFinal in an open stadium in NY, under completely
insane wind conditions, and menacing rain at any minute, until
the rain stopped the game in the 2nd set Tie-Break, for days. The
whole scenario is ludicrous, and Nadal is playing like a robot, all
his balls seemingly non-affected by the strong win, practically
making zero errors, the ultimate machine. Days later after losing
the said Tie-Break, now 2 sets down and apparently under-slept,
Gonzalez decided to lose the 3rd. Set as fast as possible & go home,
enough of this crap. The set runs really short, and as soon as the
last ball's over, the rain begins to come back. What a mess...
So I complimented him for his attitude of BEING A HUMAN, and
let the robots win the games under these conditions. Of course
then Del Potro would completely obliterate a helpless Nadal,
who seemed to have been psychologically hurt by Gonzalez' such
quick capitulation, taking the "hero" stature out of his game. So
comes Del Potro, the young newcomer that EVERYONE wants to
crush Nadal to pieces; in his incredible crushing win it seems like
Fernando Gonzalez was inside his body taking a deserved revenge
on Nadal.
When he does so, Del Potro exposes the lack of variety in Nadal's
game, his Cat & Mouse tactics go out the window, and we see such
"Clear" tennis, with incredibly natural Body Postures and foot work
-as I always envisioned since before 1976-, not just about banging
but consistently and with great simplicity out-playing the disguised
defensive 'oh-so-efficient' playing of figures like Nadal.
Gonzalez disgust on the other hand, seems to have coalesced into
a concensus about the need to put a roof on the stadium, which is
a good (Duh...!?) thing, at last.
As to Federer's tight win -(...yawns...)- against Djokovic, he once
again shows some of his usual unlikable mystique; in the 5-5 Deuce
of the crucial 1st. Set, he ungentlemanly does not concede a ball he
had already lost, when the umpire had mistakenly ordered a repeat
of the play. Then he had 3 Lucky-Balls in the 1st. 2 Sets, the 3rd.
one actually being the 2nd. Set winning ball, a drop-fast after hitting
the net ball; not his fault, however while the whole stadium is loudly
going "Ooooh Nooooo...." the camera catches his wife quite merrily
cheering & clapping to this ball, well... not exactly nice these Federers.
Then it almost appeared like the Mafia had heavily bet on a Federer
win, because only in the 1st. 2 Sets Djokovic had to challenge a wrong
line call 6 TIMES, AND 5 TIMES HE WAS RIGHT...!!!! I mean, come
on guys, let's clean up the act, alright...?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlWoVY0-WHc
And finally the Williams episode, which None-Dare-Call-It-Racist;
the victim the little old oriental line-caller lady. But it seems Racism
is a term applied strictly when it is White Racism. We whites are
Oh-So-Bad always, we are Oh-So-Racist... Never mind we are the 1st
developed nation to have elected a black president... So much racism
talk, and I don't see any black people emigrating to Africa ever, and
you know, there's plenty of excellent very high-paid jobs in Africa
right now. It seeeeeeeeeemmmmmsssss to me (as George Carlin used
to mock) that blacks are not getting it so bad in the US as they claim.
Now Serena Willims threatens the little oriental lady to 'shove the f*g
ball into her f*g throat', but that is not black racism, that is always
"something else". Oh no, thus was not racism, no no. Really...? What
I find most disturbing in the episode, is how Williams tries to pretend
she never threatened or said anything to the little oriental lady.
Ladies & Gentlemen, ALL RACES ARE RACIST, and the Jewish &
Blacks are amongst the most racist of all ! Ok...? This business of
blaming "only" the Whites, for politically-correct globalism, reeks
of high hell. Racism is a Human condition in general, not ostensibly
"just" a "white" thing, as the mainstream mantras seeks to make
us believe. It is just sad that the US Open had to witness proof of
such, now is it...? This would make for another post, but a more
careful well researched history of Slavery, shows that the black
slavery to the America's was managed in Venice -by the Venice
banksters nobility-, utilizing the Jewish networks over the globe
for logistics, and the seafarers transporting the black africans
almost never went inland, they just waited at the shore for their
black business partners in Africa to actually bring them the
captured slaves onto the ships !? Read more, study more, and ye
shall find that the real truth is a lot murkier than the simplified
charicatures we are sold as "history". Yes, not only the white
americans, but ostensibly the European nobility/aristocracy, the
Jewish (when you read "Venice Banksters", translate: "Jewish",
they were a better financial power than the monarchs !), and even
ostensibly the black power bloodlines of Africa, profited most.
But as I stated, this is just a US Open Grand Slam Tennis post,
only tangentially via Serena Williams, veering into this bad topic.
---Have a nice day!
No comments:
Post a Comment