To have a truly great interview, you need an intelligent and thoughtful interviewer who asks probing and direct questions that cannot be answered evasively, and an interviewee who is highly knowledgeable on the subject, offers original and interesting thoughts, and expresses himself clearly and concisely. Every one of these criteria is met here, which is why this 5 1/2 minute interview is such a fascinating and informative one. He explained more about why Fed is so uniquely great than I can recall anyone else doing in a long, long time.
She was also one of the top players woman’s tour. Watched her play some of the legends. Tennis announcing and doing interviews is her second career. She also had really good ground strokes.
Cool interview. That's why Federer can put pressure on you. Tennis is about putting pressure on your opponent. Federer plays fast points, serves quick and holds, putting it back on his opponent. Federer plays inside the baseline takes time from opponents. Federer serves not with speed but incredible placement. Federer comes to the net at first opportunity. All of these make pressure. Thats what pro tennis is about.......pressure.
Over the years Federer has mastered the ability to hit nearly every ball on the rise on both wings. So if an opponent is hitting the ball deep which in most scenarios is a desirable tactic, Federer just picks 'em off like half volleys with pace and direction taking time away from the opponent. He's truly remarkable.
His transition game was always good but he really took it up a notch this past year. It's like everything he's learned from Edberg and Ljubicic suddenly went from beta test mode to full blown ready for prime time mode. Thing of beauty. He attacks so suddenly, smoothly, and with steadfast conviction, and his court positioning and his technique on the volleys is the best its ever been.
Really enjoyed the interview, thank you, especially the questions about what separates Federer from others and what tennis might look like 10 years from now. Arias's answer, that even a 100 mph shot that lands short, Fed sees as a short ball, pretty cool, hadn't thought of that so much
Great interview by both. I love Jimmy Arias. On the tour while stringing rackets he asked me to warm him up and I ended up hitting with him for three days. Every time he hit to my backhand I would say, sometimes preemptively,, “Sorry Jimmy!” He’s always a gentleman. Polite, appreciative. His brother was my friend at Hopman/Saddlebrook too.
Jimmy is such a good tennis mind and the journalist asks such good questions. Its not about her, its about Jimmy, tennis and his insights. So, so good.
Spot on with the ATP feedback. The etiquette rules while important, make every game feel exactly the same. Personalities shining through, emotion showing through, would provide much needed variety.
Some of the players do some fist pumping and show enthusiasm like Raffa does. However be careful what you wish for. I been going to tournaments and watching pro tennis since 1970. I was at a match that McEnroe was defaulted on the three violation rule and the fans appalled when the umpire gave the match to Mal Washington. This is tennis not the fake professional wrestling. It sounds like you you want to watch hockey not tennis.
Jimmy Arias in my opinion is the best commentator. Listen to him call a match, his insight being a great pro, and I'm partial since he's from tennis playing generation. Just as in this interview, every single thing he said is absolutely true period. He lays it out sensibly and if you've ever played tennis this is what a great coach sounds like.
Short , straight to the point questions , with a sweet voice tone..which make the interviewee feel comfortable and give him room to show his expertise..you are spot on Madame..what's your name btw..
Surprisingly good interview. Arias seems like a great guy. Saw him practicing at the US Open once. Not sure if he was playing in the Masters event or just hitting for fun and exercise. Could pound forehands still.
Excellent responses from Arias, as others have said here, one of the best tennis interviews out there, regardless of what you think of the interviewer (I thought she was pretty good personally). A few important insights he gave into the state of play, and some of the things that separates the best of all time in tennis from the merely good.
Ive looked through various interviews posted by this channel and the comments are all positive regarding this reporter, shes done a great job and prepared herself thoroughly for all her interviews but you guys havent credited her not even once, i dont even know her name and shes the one carrying the interviews not your channels name
Wow, these are very meaningful questions from the interviewer and great answers. BTW, the taking time away, realzing short balls, aside from Roger, I think Agassi had a similar eye coordination skills. The skill of taking any ball on the rise seems like a rare one even for top players I guess.
A tennis coach and friend of mine who happens to be from Switzerland pointed out something about Federer's groundstrokes that is technically different from almost every other player on tour, and that is that he keeps his arm straight as much as possible when he strikes the ball. I've looked at his strokes and compared them with the others and it's true. I'm a casual player. I tried emulating this technique and the ball started spraying everywhere. Not as easy as it looks! But that's what Federer does. He makes everything look easy. I wonder if that slight difference in arm position is a reason for his accuracy and longevity.
That's a known thing, most tennis players and coaches know about that. There is bent arm forehand and straight arm forehand. Roger has straight arm as you mentioned, Nadal has the same. Nowadays Alcaraz has straightarm too, he is that one player who has managed to sort pf emulate the technicalities of federer forehand. That's why he can rocket forehands.
Great interview and I enjoyed listening to Mr Arias but I think he just did not want to tell the truth while kinda eluding to it (the game is one dimensional). The answer is clear. SPEED UP SOME COURTS GOD DAMNED. Make people adjust to his opponent and the speed of the court at a particular tournament. Make Wimbledon faster and US open as well. Btw players would thank the ATP because they would have to grind less and shorten the points.
hmm I think it's fast enough, the US hardcourt events are pretty fast, grass obviously as well. Anything indoor is fast. Aussie open looks fine to me as well? What tournaments would you like to speed up? :)
@@Johnny-cz2wv I understand your point, but I think Wimbledon has gone too far in the other direction slowing down the grass. The low bounce on grass courts -- that haven't been doctored the way they've done at Wimbledon -- doesn't allow you to stand back and wait for the ball to get to you the way it does on clay and hard courts. The skills to attack successfully are almost lost, except for Fed.
He's right that everyone plays the same . . . except the single handed back handers. I've been saying it for years, we need seating protection for single-handed backhanded players as they are the only graceful and creative thing left in the game.
feds is the greatest period,but Djokovic went away for 2 years now,also for young players it's difficult to break the mental barrier against guys with 12,16,20 grand slam titles....we need some punks like Kyrgios or Sock having no respect for the opponent.....it's bad,but one way to overcome the mental inferiority
Attitude is one thing and pressure play quite another. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are among the all-time Top 10. Kyrgios just does not have the tennis nous to beat them consistently.
Laszlo Szujo I strongly disagree. Even when comparing eras, it remains a tough call but common', Roger in 2004-2007 would literally slay anyone anywhere but for Rafa on clay (although he handed him a 6/0 punishment set on clay, that tells a lot). Djokovic has been punished by an out of prime Roger on several occasions which resulted in Federer keeping an even H2H against the djoker when he was supposedly unplayable. In 2011, Roger is past his prime and 1-2 in GS confrontations against Novak. A few centimeters at the 2011 US semis and he would have led the rivalry on Novak's best year consequently to his epic masterclass at Roland. The guy is just beyond the joke.. But let's enjoy the level and legendary status that the big 3 has brought to the game. Sealed in history books but still there to behold. We are some lucky devils, I'll tell you!
Agreed, but Kyrgios needs a full time, quality coach and support team to ensure that his undoubted genius achieves its full potential. Currently, he is waylaid too often by opportunistic injuries, a short attention span, and erratic career objectives. Everyone wants to see him succeed, because they sense that his tennis talent is the greatest and most athletic of any generation to date. But, at the moment, he seems more destined to wallow in the shallows.
An attractive interviewer, but anyone who's really into Tennis wouldn't have noticed her (other than her good questions), in the presence of Jimmy Arias who's talking about 35 years of tennis :)
Agree. Tennis use to be fun to watch. Now it’s so extremely boring. It’s sad. Just all mostly baseline type of game. But sports evolve I guess. Probably it will evolve to the point where it’s mostly winning from fast serves. Because the normal speed of a pro serve will just get faster and faster until you can’t return it. Or do you think I’m wrong?
So... we're not gonna talk about Federer's backhand??? He get's more velocity on his one-handed backhand than any player in the history of the sport. Also, his slice backhand and flat backhand are indistinguishable in their back swing. He can play either one and the opponent doesn't know what's coming
B Xx Dude just stop. I love Federer. My fave player of all time. His slice backhand is a great weapon, his backhand flip is legendary, his backhand drop shots are sick...and his drive and topspin backhands are very underrated, and much stronger than people gave them credit for. He has an all time great backhand in terms of its versatility. Absolutely... But this quote of yours: "He get's more velocity on his one-handed backhand than any player in the history of the sport." Is preposterous. The hardest I have ever seen Roger hit a backhand never got above 96 mph. Wheras Gasquet has hit 103 mph regularly along with Wawrinka. His velocity has never been near the top rocket hitters in the sport....but that does not matter....because he hits with consistency and placement far beyond anyone. Could he hit as hard on the forehand and backhand as the top guys in the sport? I'd say he could get close. But not at the top. But he does not need to anyway. He has accuracy, which is far more valuable.
Good interview I have one contention, though. You say, "I want these guys to be able to show you who they really are." Fine, but should we indulge nastiness? If you think a person's character is largely reliant on being confrontational, you're being depressingly unimaginative. Tsitsipas has plenty of non-nasty-character (his music, his thoughts on social media, his face) and he's not hiding it. Thiem and Shapovalov ditto. Nor are they all the same. Dustin Brown and Del Potro, e.g., are completely different people and those who can't see that just need to pay attention. I think people want to see nastiness because they like high drama more than because they're interested in characters. But tennis has plenty of high drama without it and I as a pro would not be prepared to act the asshole in order to entertain anyone. As for showing "who they really are": have you considered that a lot of players might not *want* to be assholes, might regret their public bad moments and be grateful to work in a system that penalises people who win by trashtalk rather than tennis? Because trashtalk distracts at every level. If you want good shotmaking (and I do), cut the trash. About racquet abuse: Nadal's comments are the standard for me there. It's spoilt-brat behaviour which disrespects the people who make them. It's also dumb. If you're playing badly, as a rule it's your fault and not the racquet's. The racquet is there to help you. If you love the game, it feels like a part of you. What I miss much more is pros articulating their opinions on social, political and environmental issues. Thiem is doing this. That's plenty of character.
Agree with yr comments. It was interesting that Arias told her he wanted to see Sampras stir it up and return some of Agassi's invective, that by doing so "Sampras would show us who he is." I wanted to say "well, Jimmy...Pete showed you who he is (in not taking the bait)...but you obviously didn't want to see it." This is typical of the problem children of the game...the attitude of kids who never quite get the thing about growing up. Learning to show more class as you age, by growing out of showing your fists.
Do people know what a Grand Slam really means? I'm afraid not. When a player wins in the same year all four majors ( AUSTRALIA, FRANCE, ENGLAND AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) , than and only than it can be said he won a grand Slam. The only male players who did it were Don Budge in 1938 and Rod Laver in 1962 and 1969 On women's tennis only Maureen Connolly did it in 1953, Margaret Court in 1970 and Steffi Graf in 1988. Steffi is the only tennis player to have won the Golden Slam . In 1988 she won the four Majors and the Olympic tennis championship.
more bad behaviour is good for tennis? isn't one Krygios enough? different personalities is great, but when someone is berating the umpire, delaying the match with petulant outbursts, slamming balls around, how is that good for the sport? maybe i'm one of those weirdos who is entertained by brilliant play. like Tsitsipas vs Wawrinka at Roland Garros. that said, i like most of what Jimmy said. i like honesty with minimal filtering. i grew up in the same neck of the woods as Jimmy, western New York, been seeing his picture in the paper now and then since he was 10.
as far as i am concerned...federer is the goat.....his records at ALL the grand slams is more well rounded than anyone elses...including NADAL.....nadal could become goat...but he needs to win more of the other gss' to do so......at least 3 more australian...2 more wimbledon and 1 more US .....we already know he is the best all time on clay.......
As great as the top 10 players from the 80s were none would have a chance winning a game let alone a set from those in the top ten today. Game has gone from mainly talent and touch to strength, power and mechanics.
Jimmy's comments about the lack of personalities in tennis, naturally, make me think of Kyrgios. Although there appears to be a clear generational divide regarding him, even though I'm an old guy I love Nick. The problem is that his personality is interfering with his playing, and that's a massive waste. Frankly, the guy should have won at least 2-3 majors by now. I would really like to see this interviewer have a conversation with Nick.
She's a great interviewer. Jimmy Arias gives himself way too much credit for his forehand. Yes, it was a potent weapon, but Borg was using the Western grip well before Arias came along and started using the semi-western grip. Even Guillermo Vilas was using a semi-western grip. Certainly Borg, Vilas, and Lendl influenced today's forehand much moreso than Arias. Also, Jimmy might be my least favorite tennis commentator along with Ted Robinson. But I do agree with him that the game is very homogenous. Same for the women's game.
no word about nick krygios the real goat he beat fed,nadal,djoker and if all atp mafia didnt put him to play at stupid hourse and bad draft he could have been nr 1 already.
College players need to work on keeping emotions in check - that's their shortcoming according to Jimmy A, yet he wants pros to fly off the handle. Hmm. I much prefer this generation of pros which show respect and are less toxic and hateful on a whole. Agassi was one of my least favorite players bc of his lack of class - Even to this day at a charity event he still picks fights and embarrasses everyone. I loved Jimmy A back in the day bc he was original and was far classier than Agassi, maybe he should go back to coaching college.
I don't think today's game is better. I guess Arias sort of has to say this because he's in this business. But changes in racquet technology have homogenized the game. Now everyone can hit a huge forehand with topspin, whereas it used to be difficult to do. I don't see how one can conclude from this that the game is better. Quite the opposite. It's boring.
This guy wants tennis players to be rude like wrestling hitting each other with rackets and balls. It's debatable whether Federer is the best player ever. Nadal in the opinion of many great players is the greatest tennis player.
Not at all. Arias can beat Federer in French Open if they were in 80s. Federer is the best in graphite raquet, but his performance will decline if he used a wood racket in Arias' time.
multiple cables replicas tsn sinks espn jim rush overboard splash rosters next sam gore reports espn off air zones across circuit plazas ring over cash rigs spikes rates
Jimmy say , that should be right to say, I hate him and scrimming and be a luod when they play? have a miss some thing here? Tennis is a gentelemen sport and there is no one some shall scrim on the court : I hatre this man i meet here on the court: so stupid to say from a X proffesionel Player.
I don't think Federer is the best tennis player ... one thing is, perhaps you like Federer style of playing but doesn't mean he is the best!!! If he really was so good as you're pretend to making look, he should be able to play in all the surfaces......
Beautiful Soul+ Federer cant play on all surfaces? You do realize that the ONLY thing that stopped Roger Federer from winning 5 French Open championships on clay and 13 ATP Masters Championships on clay....is being in the same era with the greatest clay court tennis player in history, Rafa Nadal? Federer *CAN* play on clay -1 French Open CHAMPION on CLAY -5 French Open Finals reached on CLAY -6 ATP MASTERS TOURNAMENT CHAMPION on clay (including two vs the great Rafa) -16 ATP MASTERS FINALS Reached on Clay 75 Total ATP CLay Events Entered 11 Times Champion Total record on clay: 214 wins 68 losses 76% win rate Go do your homework, kid. You are a fool.
Federer has amazing forehand but Novak is better from the baseline, better ball striker overall. Also Federer has one of the best serves off all time, without it, he get mauled by a number of players
Fed was that good in defense also when he was younger.. He actually always adapted to conditions and age and all that, which is what makes his career lot more interesting. We are yet to see if Novak would make those adjustments now that he is getting past 30 too. You can't just continue with that level of superior defense all the time. Novak has much error free backhand than Fed and better service return, but overall Fed has lot more complete game than Novak.
Globox822 Roger would get mauled without his serve....i mean, what should that really mean? Its like saying Rafa would get mauled without his Forehand or Novak would get mauled without his quickness and flexibilty. Why do people think a good serve is not as much of an achievement as any other shot in the game? Djokovic is taller and Nadal is as tall as Federer and still they cant serve nearly as good - it is his greatness that makes his serve better. Thats the point and thats why I dont get in your comment and think its pretty stupid. And yes Djokovic is a better baseline player most of the time - not always. Roger beat him 2011 at the French when Novak hasnt lost a single match that year before. And he did it from the baseline. The baseline is just a part of the game, just like Serve. Federers serve, volley, slice and Forehand are better than Djokovics and make him the greater All Court player. I dont think anybody could doubt it.
What?! She laughed, she smiles, she nods. Also, it's the interviewers job to have the focus be on the interviewee, which she does a great job of. She gets great answers outta Jim because she's able to put him at ease. You think Jim would tell that story about what Agassi said about Sampras on ESPN? A lot of woman hating on UA-cam, like the point of this interview is what Jim has to say and you're just focusing on the woman, like that's all you can think about
Alexander Jay Your first part is something I may agree with. I might have been a little too harsh on her but I still stick with my opinion that she could have done a better job by being emotionless. For the second part, shut the fuck up with your woman and man hating shit man. Sensitive people like you are the reason feminism exists. She's a woman so I had to say woman, what else do you expect me to say? Don't get me wrong, I'm not sexist to any degree!
I don't get what people want out of their interviewers. They ask their questions, they listen to the response, what else are they suppose to do? Interrupt him? Fake laugh like Jimmy Fallon? Jump up and down and wave their arms?
Please get more interviewers like this. The ones who actually understand the nuances of tennis. Makes you fall in love with the game all over again
Impressive guy. Straight to the point. No bla bla and lets all be neutral. He has a clear opinion.
To have a truly great interview, you need an intelligent and thoughtful interviewer who asks probing and direct questions that cannot be answered evasively, and an interviewee who is highly knowledgeable on the subject, offers original and interesting thoughts, and expresses himself clearly and concisely. Every one of these criteria is met here, which is why this 5 1/2 minute interview is such a fascinating and informative one. He explained more about why Fed is so uniquely great than I can recall anyone else doing in a long, long time.
Agreed
Okay, but Jimmy is wrong. Djokovic is the greatest.
a journalist who asks about a particular tennis grip (in this case semiwestern) is a great journalist. Technical question, not trivia.
And she is so beautiful😚
She was also one of the top players woman’s tour. Watched her play some of the legends. Tennis announcing and doing interviews is her second career. She also had really good ground strokes.
Cool interview. That's why Federer can put pressure on you. Tennis is about putting pressure on your opponent. Federer plays fast points, serves quick and holds, putting it back on his opponent. Federer plays inside the baseline takes time from opponents. Federer serves not with speed but incredible placement. Federer comes to the net at first opportunity. All of these make pressure. Thats what pro tennis is about.......pressure.
Totally agree. Federer's ability to take time away from his opponents is what makes him the best.
fed slice kick serve is impesive , is slow speed but dificult for returning.
Over the years Federer has mastered the ability to hit nearly every ball on the rise on both wings. So if an opponent is hitting the ball deep which in most scenarios is a desirable tactic, Federer just picks 'em off like half volleys with pace and direction taking time away from the opponent. He's truly remarkable.
graftonreed f
His transition game was always good but he really took it up a notch this past year. It's like everything he's learned from Edberg and Ljubicic suddenly went from beta test mode to full blown ready for prime time mode. Thing of beauty. He attacks so suddenly, smoothly, and with steadfast conviction, and his court positioning and his technique on the volleys is the best its ever been.
federer is blessed with amazing hand eye co-ordination..
Really enjoyed the interview, thank you, especially the questions about what separates Federer from others and what tennis might look like 10 years from now. Arias's answer, that even a 100 mph shot that lands short, Fed sees as a short ball, pretty cool, hadn't thought of that so much
the interviewer asked the right questions. well done her.
Great interview by both. I love Jimmy Arias. On the tour while stringing rackets he asked me to warm him up and I ended up hitting with him for three days. Every time he hit to my backhand I would say, sometimes preemptively,, “Sorry Jimmy!” He’s always a gentleman. Polite, appreciative. His brother was my friend at Hopman/Saddlebrook too.
That was genuinely worthwhile! Thanks Jimmy.
Jimmy is such a good tennis mind and the journalist asks such good questions. Its not about her, its about Jimmy, tennis and his insights. So, so good.
Spot on with the ATP feedback. The etiquette rules while important, make every game feel exactly the same. Personalities shining through, emotion showing through, would provide much needed variety.
Some of the players do some fist pumping and show enthusiasm like Raffa does. However be careful what you wish for. I been going to tournaments and watching pro tennis since 1970. I was at a match that McEnroe was defaulted on the three violation rule and the fans appalled when the umpire gave the match to Mal Washington. This is tennis not the fake professional wrestling. It sounds like you you want to watch hockey not tennis.
Jimmy Arias in my opinion is the best commentator. Listen to him call a match, his insight being a great pro, and I'm partial since he's from tennis playing generation. Just as in this interview, every single thing he said is absolutely true period. He lays it out sensibly and if you've ever played tennis this is what a great coach sounds like.
Who's the reporter? She's hot.
and smart, given her questions. Very enjoyable.
@@winchie37 and HOT!
Dominique van boekel
Most insightful comment about Federer's skill I've ever heard...all the other comments are good too.
Great interview, sensible questions only, and valuable answers. Nice!
Short , straight to the point questions , with a sweet voice tone..which make the interviewee feel comfortable and give him room to show his expertise..you are spot on Madame..what's your name btw..
Surprisingly good interview. Arias seems like a great guy. Saw him practicing at the US Open once. Not sure if he was playing in the Masters event or just hitting for fun and exercise. Could pound forehands still.
Awesome interview!
dang, never knew jimmy was so interesting! love him
Excellent responses from Arias, as others have said here, one of the best tennis interviews out there, regardless of what you think of the interviewer (I thought she was pretty good personally). A few important insights he gave into the state of play, and some of the things that separates the best of all time in tennis from the merely good.
Great interview. Arias is the best.
Ive looked through various interviews posted by this channel and the comments are all positive regarding this reporter, shes done a great job and prepared herself thoroughly for all her interviews but you guys havent credited her not even once, i dont even know her name and shes the one carrying the interviews not your channels name
5 minute interview that rocks
Wow, these are very meaningful questions from the interviewer and great answers.
BTW, the taking time away, realzing short balls, aside from Roger, I think Agassi had a similar eye coordination skills. The skill of taking any ball on the rise seems like a rare one even for top players I guess.
Excellent interview! Great questions! Thank you.
A tennis coach and friend of mine who happens to be from Switzerland pointed out something about Federer's groundstrokes that is technically different from almost every other player on tour, and that is that he keeps his arm straight as much as possible when he strikes the ball. I've looked at his strokes and compared them with the others and it's true. I'm a casual player. I tried emulating this technique and the ball started spraying everywhere. Not as easy as it looks! But that's what Federer does. He makes everything look easy. I wonder if that slight difference in arm position is a reason for his accuracy and longevity.
That's a known thing, most tennis players and coaches know about that. There is bent arm forehand and straight arm forehand. Roger has straight arm as you mentioned, Nadal has the same. Nowadays Alcaraz has straightarm too, he is that one player who has managed to sort pf emulate the technicalities of federer forehand. That's why he can rocket forehands.
Very astute comments. How is he not an analyst on TV?
Super interesting interview!
Great interview and I enjoyed listening to Mr Arias but I think he just did not want to tell the truth while kinda eluding to it (the game is one dimensional). The answer is clear. SPEED UP SOME COURTS GOD DAMNED. Make people adjust to his opponent and the speed of the court at a particular tournament. Make Wimbledon faster and US open as well. Btw players would thank the ATP because they would have to grind less and shorten the points.
hmm I think it's fast enough, the US hardcourt events are pretty fast, grass obviously as well. Anything indoor is fast. Aussie open looks fine to me as well? What tournaments would you like to speed up? :)
johan van til Wimbledon US open and the rest of them.
@@Johnny-cz2wv I understand your point, but I think Wimbledon has gone too far in the other direction slowing down the grass. The low bounce on grass courts -- that haven't been doctored the way they've done at Wimbledon -- doesn't allow you to stand back and wait for the ball to get to you the way it does on clay and hard courts. The skills to attack successfully are almost lost, except for Fed.
Beautiful and smart-great tennis journalist.She belongs at the slams.
a former player.
good insights
Who is interviewer?
What about different surfaces on the court? Slow surfaces for the service boxes and fast surfaces for the rest.
Would be interesting.
;legit comments = so modern tennis is precise but boring, yup
Scrolled all the way down and still can't find the interviewer's name
Ahmad Zakuan Zakaria Dominique van boekel i think or something
This guy is awesome
very good interview. great questions and insightful answers.
Racket technology has changed the style of play.
Arias' comments were hilarious! In a good way! I'm referring to 2:55 and 3:29, btw. Hilarious!
good!
What is the interviewers name ? She is great !!
lol no...
lmfao
great guy
He's right that everyone plays the same . . . except the single handed back handers. I've been saying it for years, we need seating protection for single-handed backhanded players as they are the only graceful and creative thing left in the game.
She sort of sounds like Li Na from her iconic AO victory speech.
Is the interviewer a tour player? Anyone know her?
She is beautiful. Who is she !
Yep Fed reacts quicker than anyone else.
feds is the greatest period,but Djokovic went away for 2 years now,also for young players it's difficult to break the mental barrier against guys with 12,16,20 grand slam titles....we need some punks like Kyrgios or Sock having no respect for the opponent.....it's bad,but one way to overcome the mental inferiority
I agree,though I 'd like to see him compete against the new version of Fed
Attitude is one thing and pressure play quite another. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are among the all-time Top 10. Kyrgios just does not have the tennis nous to beat them consistently.
I agree
Laszlo Szujo I strongly disagree. Even when comparing eras, it remains a tough call but common', Roger in 2004-2007 would literally slay anyone anywhere but for Rafa on clay (although he handed him a 6/0 punishment set on clay, that tells a lot).
Djokovic has been punished by an out of prime Roger on several occasions which resulted in Federer keeping an even H2H against the djoker when he was supposedly unplayable.
In 2011, Roger is past his prime and 1-2 in GS confrontations against Novak. A few centimeters at the 2011 US semis and he would have led the rivalry on Novak's best year consequently to his epic masterclass at Roland. The guy is just beyond the joke.. But let's enjoy the level and legendary status that the big 3 has brought to the game. Sealed in history books but still there to behold. We are some lucky devils, I'll tell you!
Agreed, but Kyrgios needs a full time, quality coach and support team to ensure that his undoubted genius achieves its full potential. Currently, he is waylaid too often by opportunistic injuries, a short attention span, and erratic career objectives. Everyone wants to see him succeed, because they sense that his tennis talent is the greatest and most athletic of any generation to date. But, at the moment, he seems more destined to wallow in the shallows.
This GOAT debate in nauseating. Let me simplify it.........it's Federer.
True
Jimmy was a pioneer with that great forehand. Not so much with the backhand. :)
Jimmy Arias won how many Grand Slams?
An attractive interviewer, but anyone who's really into Tennis wouldn't have noticed her (other than her good questions), in the presence of Jimmy Arias who's talking about 35 years of tennis :)
I noticed her not because of her looks but because of her fantastic in-depth tennis questions
You are an a-hole!!!
OOPS!!! Sorry, that was meant for "pop1848"...sorry about that!!! :-|
@@mantell No, s/he's a character ;-)
Agree. Tennis use to be fun to watch. Now it’s so extremely boring. It’s sad. Just all mostly baseline type of game. But sports evolve I guess. Probably it will evolve to the point where it’s mostly winning from fast serves. Because the normal speed of a pro serve will just get faster and faster until you can’t return it. Or do you think I’m wrong?
So... we're not gonna talk about Federer's backhand??? He get's more velocity on his one-handed backhand than any player in the history of the sport. Also, his slice backhand and flat backhand are indistinguishable in their back swing. He can play either one and the opponent doesn't know what's coming
B Xx
Dude just stop.
I love Federer. My fave player of all time. His slice backhand is a great weapon, his backhand flip is legendary, his backhand drop shots are sick...and his drive and topspin backhands are very underrated, and much stronger than people gave them credit for. He has an all time great backhand in terms of its versatility. Absolutely...
But this quote of yours:
"He get's more velocity on his one-handed backhand than any player in the history of the sport."
Is preposterous.
The hardest I have ever seen Roger hit a backhand never got above 96 mph.
Wheras Gasquet has hit 103 mph regularly along with Wawrinka.
His velocity has never been near the top rocket hitters in the sport....but that does not matter....because he hits with consistency and placement far beyond anyone. Could he hit as hard on the forehand and backhand as the top guys in the sport? I'd say he could get close. But not at the top. But he does not need to anyway. He has accuracy, which is far more valuable.
теннис -- это круто
Good interview I have one contention, though. You say, "I want these guys to be able to show you who they really are." Fine, but should we indulge nastiness? If you think a person's character is largely reliant on being confrontational, you're being depressingly unimaginative. Tsitsipas has plenty of non-nasty-character (his music, his thoughts on social media, his face) and he's not hiding it. Thiem and Shapovalov ditto. Nor are they all the same. Dustin Brown and Del Potro, e.g., are completely different people and those who can't see that just need to pay attention. I think people want to see nastiness because they like high drama more than because they're interested in characters. But tennis has plenty of high drama without it and I as a pro would not be prepared to act the asshole in order to entertain anyone. As for showing "who they really are": have you considered that a lot of players might not *want* to be assholes, might regret their public bad moments and be grateful to work in a system that penalises people who win by trashtalk rather than tennis? Because trashtalk distracts at every level. If you want good shotmaking (and I do), cut the trash. About racquet abuse: Nadal's comments are the standard for me there. It's spoilt-brat behaviour which disrespects the people who make them. It's also dumb. If you're playing badly, as a rule it's your fault and not the racquet's. The racquet is there to help you. If you love the game, it feels like a part of you.
What I miss much more is pros articulating their opinions on social, political and environmental issues. Thiem is doing this. That's plenty of character.
Agree with yr comments. It was interesting that Arias told her he wanted to see Sampras stir it up and return some of Agassi's invective, that by doing so "Sampras would show us who he is." I wanted to say "well, Jimmy...Pete showed you who he is (in not taking the bait)...but you obviously didn't want to see it." This is typical of the problem children of the game...the attitude of kids who never quite get the thing about growing up. Learning to show more class as you age, by growing out of showing your fists.
Do people know what a Grand Slam really means? I'm afraid not. When a player wins in the same year all four majors ( AUSTRALIA, FRANCE, ENGLAND AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) , than and only than it can be said he won a grand Slam. The only male players who did it were Don Budge in 1938 and Rod Laver in 1962 and 1969 On women's tennis only Maureen Connolly did it in 1953, Margaret Court in 1970 and Steffi Graf in 1988. Steffi is the only tennis player to have won the Golden Slam . In 1988 she won the four Majors and the Olympic tennis championship.
Who did this lovely woman interview?…
more bad behaviour is good for tennis? isn't one Krygios enough? different personalities is great, but when someone is berating the umpire, delaying the match with petulant outbursts, slamming balls around, how is that good for the sport? maybe i'm one of those weirdos who is entertained by brilliant play. like Tsitsipas vs Wawrinka at Roland Garros. that said, i like most of what Jimmy said. i like honesty with minimal filtering. i grew up in the same neck of the woods as Jimmy, western New York, been seeing his picture in the paper now and then since he was 10.
as far as i am concerned...federer is the goat.....his records at ALL the grand slams is more well rounded than anyone elses...including NADAL.....nadal could become goat...but he needs to win more of the other gss' to do so......at least 3 more australian...2 more wimbledon and 1 more US .....we already know he is the best all time on clay.......
As great as the top 10 players from the 80s were none would have a chance winning a game let alone a set from those in the top ten today. Game has gone from mainly talent and touch to strength, power and mechanics.
Give Lebron a tennis racket and he would win 30 grand slams
Chris C oh give me a break
Jimmy's comments about the lack of personalities in tennis, naturally, make me think of Kyrgios. Although there appears to be a clear generational divide regarding him, even though I'm an old guy I love Nick. The problem is that his personality is interfering with his playing, and that's a massive waste. Frankly, the guy should have won at least 2-3 majors by now. I would really like to see this interviewer have a conversation with Nick.
She's a great interviewer. Jimmy Arias gives himself way too much credit for his forehand. Yes, it was a potent weapon, but Borg was using the Western grip well before Arias came along and started using the semi-western grip. Even Guillermo Vilas was using a semi-western grip. Certainly Borg, Vilas, and Lendl influenced today's forehand much moreso than Arias. Also, Jimmy might be my least favorite tennis commentator along with Ted Robinson. But I do agree with him that the game is very homogenous. Same for the women's game.
players should be allowed to get timeouts to talk to coach. happens in football, basketball
nah, the beauty in tennis is just in that you have to figure it out by yourself
sorry he drills attacking short balls ask Sven Lundgren
no word about nick krygios the real goat he beat fed,nadal,djoker and if all atp mafia didnt put him to play at stupid hourse and bad draft he could have been nr 1 already.
College players need to work on keeping emotions in check - that's their shortcoming according to Jimmy A, yet he wants pros to fly off the handle. Hmm. I much prefer this generation of pros which show respect and are less toxic and hateful on a whole. Agassi was one of my least favorite players bc of his lack of class - Even to this day at a charity event he still picks fights and embarrasses everyone. I loved Jimmy A back in the day bc he was original and was far classier than Agassi, maybe he should go back to coaching college.
tennis should've always stayed with wood racquets. just like pro baseball and the wood bat.
Djokovic is!!!
She is incredibly hot sauce
I don't think today's game is better. I guess Arias sort of has to say this because he's in this business. But changes in racquet technology have homogenized the game. Now everyone can hit a huge forehand with topspin, whereas it used to be difficult to do. I don't see how one can conclude from this that the game is better. Quite the opposite. It's boring.
This guy wants tennis players to be rude like wrestling hitting each other with rackets and balls. It's debatable whether Federer is the best player ever. Nadal in the opinion of many great players is the greatest tennis player.
Novak is the best tennis player TBH.
Not at all. Arias can beat Federer in French Open if they were in 80s. Federer is the best in graphite raquet, but his performance will decline if he used a wood racket in Arias' time.
multiple cables replicas tsn sinks espn jim rush overboard splash rosters next sam gore reports espn off air zones across circuit plazas ring over cash rigs spikes rates
Jimmy say , that should be right to say, I hate him and scrimming and be a luod when they play? have a miss some thing here? Tennis is a gentelemen sport and there is no one some shall scrim on the court : I hatre this man i meet here on the court: so stupid to say from a X proffesionel Player.
This is aging like milk, Jimmy 😂😂😂
She looks like Nadal's girlfriend.
She is .... um ..... perky
I don't think Federer is the best tennis player ... one thing is, perhaps you like Federer style of playing but doesn't mean he is the best!!! If he really was so good as you're pretend to making look, he should be able to play in all the surfaces......
Beautiful Soul+
Federer cant play on all surfaces? You do realize that the ONLY thing that stopped Roger Federer from winning 5 French Open championships on clay and 13 ATP Masters Championships on clay....is being in the same era with the greatest clay court tennis player in history, Rafa Nadal?
Federer *CAN* play on clay
-1 French Open CHAMPION on CLAY
-5 French Open Finals reached on CLAY
-6 ATP MASTERS TOURNAMENT CHAMPION on clay (including two vs the great Rafa)
-16 ATP MASTERS FINALS Reached on Clay
75 Total ATP CLay Events Entered
11 Times Champion
Total record on clay:
214 wins 68 losses
76% win rate
Go do your homework, kid.
You are a fool.
Federer has amazing forehand but Novak is better from the baseline, better ball striker overall.
Also Federer has one of the best serves off all time, without it, he get mauled by a number of players
Novak is just better in defence and return.
When it comes to attacking tennis he cant match with fedex.
Fed was that good in defense also when he was younger.. He actually always adapted to conditions and age and all that, which is what makes his career lot more interesting. We are yet to see if Novak would make those adjustments now that he is getting past 30 too. You can't just continue with that level of superior defense all the time. Novak has much error free backhand than Fed and better service return, but overall Fed has lot more complete game than Novak.
Globox822 Roger would get mauled without his serve....i mean, what should that really mean? Its like saying Rafa would get mauled without his Forehand or Novak would get mauled without his quickness and flexibilty. Why do people think a good serve is not as much of an achievement as any other shot in the game? Djokovic is taller and Nadal is as tall as Federer and still they cant serve nearly as good - it is his greatness that makes his serve better. Thats the point and thats why I dont get in your comment and think its pretty stupid.
And yes Djokovic is a better baseline player most of the time - not always. Roger beat him 2011 at the French when Novak hasnt lost a single match that year before. And he did it from the baseline. The baseline is just a part of the game, just like Serve. Federers serve, volley, slice and Forehand are better than Djokovics and make him the greater All Court player. I dont think anybody could doubt it.
Joe Publico Oh you mean when Roger was 30+ years old Djokovic won 5 out of 7? Awesome.
Joe Publico That is to be seen. Maybe he doesn’t have longevity or he will have. Let’s wait.
This woman is the worst interviewer. Seriosuly could you be any more emotionless?
What?! She laughed, she smiles, she nods.
Also, it's the interviewers job to have the focus be on the interviewee, which she does a great job of. She gets great answers outta Jim because she's able to put him at ease. You think Jim would tell that story about what Agassi said about Sampras on ESPN?
A lot of woman hating on UA-cam, like the point of this interview is what Jim has to say and you're just focusing on the woman, like that's all you can think about
Alexander Jay I agree, she got really good answers outta Jimmy Arias.
weird i thought it was a great interview and she did a fine job
Don’t agree at all- she was very good with her questions and her style of interviewing was great.
Alexander Jay Your first part is something I may agree with. I might have been a little too harsh on her but I still stick with my opinion that she could have done a better job by being emotionless.
For the second part, shut the fuck up with your woman and man hating shit man. Sensitive people like you are the reason feminism exists. She's a woman so I had to say woman, what else do you expect me to say? Don't get me wrong, I'm not sexist to any degree!
she is a poor journalist/reporter, english is not her first language, maybe thats a hinderance but she seems to have no personality, very robotic.
I don't get what people want out of their interviewers. They ask their questions, they listen to the response, what else are they suppose to do? Interrupt him? Fake laugh like Jimmy Fallon? Jump up and down and wave their arms?
It was a great interview. Jimmy Arias could expand on his answers. I like listening to interviewees and not ingerviewers.
She was just fine..in many ways.. :-]
she made great questions! and it was a really great interview! who cares about the accent?????
It is a gorgeous, gorgeous accent.. :-]
Plus, english not being your first language certainly does not make you a "poor" journalist. Good grief..