Your New Hero?

Federer Fans. Murray Fans. Nadal Fans. I have left out Djokovic due to his current successes.

When these players finally hang up their racquets or descend into tennis obscurity, who will replace them in your mind as a new Hero for you to follow?

I remember Becker being my first tennis Hero. When he hung up his racquet in 1999, despite declining after Wimbledon in 1996, it was difficult viewing yes. I have to say yes I jumped on the Timbo bandwagon. Purely because I thought he could be the man to take British tennis to new heights. Heartbreak after heartbreak and 'acceptance' of failure goes hand in hand with success too.

Roll on 2001 and the emergence of Hewitt, Roddick, Federer, Nalbandian. It helped breathe new life into tennis in the Mens game. Anyone who is anyone remembers Wimbledon 2001, not for just Tim's failure, but Federer's victory over Sampras. Never has such a moment encapsulated 'Passing of the torch' Also at the US Open that year Hewitt displaced Sampras and suddenly tennis had multiple players to follow. Murray, Nadal, Djokovic crashed the party from 2005. Murray and Federer and Nadal quickly became Hero's of mine.

Here we are now 2012 rolling on and who will now be our Hero's or what qualities will your new Hero have?

Raonic, Tomic, Dolgopolov, Dimitrov, Sock, Harrison?

Out of that group, I lean towards Dolgopolov and Dimitrov

I hope my new Hero will be a British Slam winner!!

None of those six that you mention look like being slam winners to me.

Raonic is too one dimensional
Tomic has no weapons
Dolgopolov is nothing but a show pony
Dimitrov is a Federer wannabe, but without the genius
Sock & Harrison are typical one dimensional USTA system clones.

Of course, I am sure I will be proven wrong.

It will be the most talented player who can deliver under the toughest pressure.

So for now I don;t know. I don't even know whether there will be such player.

Marcus wrote:None of those six that you mention look like being slam winners to me.

Raonic is too one dimensional
Tomic has no weapons
Dolgopolov is nothing but a show pony
Dimitrov is a Federer wannabe, but without the genius
Sock & Harrison are typical one dimensional USTA system clones.

Of course, I am sure I will be proven wrong.

Sadly, I have to agree with you Marcus - really poor show from both Tomic and Harrison in Basel. The oldies seem to be climbing the rankings much faster than the yoof.

I have some hope that Raonic might just be a threat at least, because he has weapons and seems to have a good temperament or at least have mastered his nature. Like all big men, the miraculous JMDP excepted of course, he just looks a little clumsy on court sometimes and he has sustained one injury already.

It is hard to see where the next hero is coming from atm.

Funny thing about following sport. You can start off being only mildly interested in a team or a player and then the full force of their personality/achievement hit you. You may find this "conversion" comes from seeing them in the flesh or as they break records, for the statistical side of sport is important and not just for anoraks.
I was a great Laver fan and I loved Borg. With Henman it was a visceral, gut-wreching, hide-behind-the-sofa, patriotic thing. It was not really until around 2004 that I got into Fed.
As for the new heroes, who knows ? Not sure anyone should write off Tomic. Murray did not have a lot of weapons when he was dismantling Stepanek at Wimbledon in 05 and almost beating Nalby. And he aint done too badly since.
Hoping Laura Robson will do well as she is so young she might be able to see me through to my dotage.

Maybe the next hero will be British! They're certainly performing well at junior level. I expect a ton of British wildcards at Wimbers next year.

One thing is for sure, there doesn't appear to be a once in a generation player out there in the next crop of yoofs. Perhaps we're expecting too much, as we have most certainly been spoilt in the last 10 years.

I am pretty sure all those named above will be in the top 10or thereabout in teh next 2 years but do I see a clear winner? not for now.

Choose from:
Oliver Golding (junior slam winner)
Liam Broady (junior slam runner-up)
George Morgan (junior slam semi-finalist)
Kyle Edmund (junior slam semi-finalist, 16 years old)

Heather Watson (junior slam winner)
Laura Robon (junior slam winner)
Eleanor Dean (just turned fifteen years old)

Tenez wrote:I am pretty sure all those named above will be in the top 10or thereabout in the next 2 years but do I see a clear winner? not for now.

If they all make it into the top 10 that would be quite a feat, and quite a shake-up of the top 10! To me, Tomic and Raonic stick out. Love the way Dolgopolov plays but not sure he can be a really top player. Wot 'bout Nishikori. Only reason he's not higher than he is, is that he was hit by injury as he was making good progress as a teenager. He could be one to look out for.

I think there's a technical improvement with most of the listed younger players, as there ought to be given who they've had as examples to model their games on. From what I've seen/remember they all have reliable big serves and potent groundstrokes. They're just not quite stringing it all together yet.

I've not seen much of Tomic's matches so far but I was looking at youtube clips of his forehand and it's unique. He's has an incredibly relaxed, loose motion. I'm not sure if he has 'no weapons' but the power he's generating is coming very easily and naturally which certainly indicates a solid base to build on.

Edit: Actually, watching some more clips his forehand looks rubbish. I can't figure this guy out.

Actually, Federer may well have contributed to ruining the game for me as I find it difficult to get very inspired at anyone else's tennis just now. Maybe after he's been gone a while my standards can fall enough for someone to come in.

The only guys who have ever inhabited the bogbrush Hall of Fame are Borg, McEnroe, Lendl and Federer so it may be a while.

Lets not leave Del Boy out, he is one of those believed by many to carry the torch after Fed, injury denied his success, but he will come back stronger and harder.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Lets not leave Del Boy out, he is one of those believed by many to carry the torch after Fed, injury denied his success, but he will come back stronger and harder.

An excellent point. The great JMDP will dominate tennis for the next 10 years.

bogbrush wrote:Actually, Federer may well have contributed to ruining the game for me as I find it difficult to get very inspired at anyone else's tennis just now. Maybe after he's been gone a while my standards can fall enough for someone to come in.

The only guys who have ever inhabited the bogbrush Hall of Fame are Borg, McEnroe, Lendl and Federer so it may be a while.

Can we not stick Timbo in there?

Marcus

Djordje Djokovic

legendkillar wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Actually, Federer may well have contributed to ruining the game for me as I find it difficult to get very inspired at anyone else's tennis just now. Maybe after he's been gone a while my standards can fall enough for someone to come in.

The only guys who have ever inhabited the bogbrush Hall of Fame are Borg, McEnroe, Lendl and Federer so it may be a while.

Can we not stick Timbo in there?

Only in the corridor marked "sources of great frustration".

Spose it's a mark on how close anyone comes to a national institution when people start fretting about Murray's matches as much as they did about Henman's. I always want Murray to win, but I'm far less disappointed at his defeats than Henman's. Anyone else have the same emotions? Can't stand it when Fed loses, either, so it's not always a patriotic thing.

I like Liam Broady. I am hoping he can maximise his potential and as can Oliver Golding. The British girls are looking good. Especially Watson.

sirfredperry wrote:Spose it's a mark on how close anyone comes to a national institution when people start fretting about Murray's matches as much as they did about Henman's. I always want Murray to win, but I'm far less disappointed at his defeats than Henman's. Anyone else have the same emotions? Can't stand it when Fed loses, either, so it's not always a patriotic thing.

Not at all patriotic for me - I don't like Fed to lose to anyone, I never minded Henman losing too much except for vs. Bjorkman at Aus Open 2002 when he had a great chance in a collapsed draw and slightly less so at Wimbledon 2001 (but I was pleased for Ivanisevic). I don't like it when Murray loses and I really hate it when Murray keeps on losing in big matches vs. Nadal (similar but less so with Djoko) but I feel distinctly ambivalent when he plays TMF.

For me it's worse if I think that the player I favour has a real chance and he loses - Henman I usually did not, Murray I usually do, as also with TMF.

barrystar wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:Spose it's a mark on how close anyone comes to a national institution when people start fretting about Murray's matches as much as they did about Henman's. I always want Murray to win, but I'm far less disappointed at his defeats than Henman's. Anyone else have the same emotions? Can't stand it when Fed loses, either, so it's not always a patriotic thing.

Not at all patriotic for me - I don't like Fed to lose to anyone, I never minded Henman losing too much except for vs. Bjorkman at Aus Open 2002 when he had a great chance in a collapsed draw and slightly less so at Wimbledon 2001 (but I was pleased for Ivanisevic). I don't like it when Murray loses and I really hate it when Murray keeps on losing in big matches vs. Nadal (similar but less so with Djoko) but I feel distinctly ambivalent when he plays TMF.

For me it's worse if I think that the player I favour has a real chance and he loses - Henman I usually did not, Murray I usually do, as also with TMF.

I hate it when TMF loses still. I am ambivalent when Murray plays TMF, but I still slightly favour latter - my mother is Swiss though, so I don't think I am being unpatriotic - just a bit split!!! I love Djokovic but don't get quite so emotionally involved, so maybe there is a patrioticy thing going on with me? Hated seeing Timbo lose - all those Wimbledon semis and quarters watching through my fingers!

Personally, I regard the Murray-Federer clashes as a win-win situation. I loved the GS finals they played, as either result would be something to celebrate. The one guy I didn't mind Henman losing to was Agassi. I was such a big Laver fan that I was about the only guy in the crowd - yes, I was there - who was unhappy when Rod lost to Roger Taylor at Wimbledon in 1970. Damn Taylor. He was only sposed to win a set, or perhaps two. As it was, the cheering on Centre Court was so loud they had to suspend play on some of the outside courts !

Bt like any win-win situation, it's also a lose-lose, isn't it? But I know what you mean...