ctjcad
Regular Member
Well..
- True, Markis and whoever was his partner never won any big titles nor made "big bangs" when they were teens. However, it's not really a surprise. As a matter of fact, if one is to do a bit of research, one will find that most of the INA's doubles greats (Christian H., Tony G., Candra W., Sigit B., to name a few) didn't get a taste of their first major or non-major title(s) til they were in their early twenties. Roughly the same age as Markis & Hendra when they won their first major title. Markis and whoever his partner was (Hendra) won the Asian Champ and Indonesia Open when they were 21. Heck, he & his partner were the runner-ups in the Denmark Open when he was 20.
- Maria? What about her? What major, or even Open type, tourneys has she won other than finishing as a Semifinalist in last yr's OG? All of her titles have been Satellite type tourneys.
- Personally, I take what Taufik say or mentioned with a grain of salt. Remember, he kinda said/mentioned the same thing before, during his 2006-2008 big tourney appearances, yet look at what happened.
I'm only concerned about result. If his current "attitude on court" has changed etc., like he said, well, let's see 'em titles, esp. SS titles, rack up by the boatload.
If the percentage of winning it all is say @ 30% (less than 50%), w/veteran players or not, like you put it, then why don't PBSI give the younger, with some experience players a chance to perform. Rather than the same old, same old players? The younger, more experienced players have got nothing to lose & they'll gain something from being put in this type of high level team competition.
- It's fine if we agree to disagree. But i'm still looking for an explanation on why sending & playing veteran players instead of younger, somewhat experienced players will benefit the players, esp. the veteran players?
What will the veteran players gain if they're the ones being asked to play & perform? What will the younger, somewhat more experienced players gain by not given a chance to play?
- I don't really care much whether Tommy is 2 or 3 or 4 yrs younger than Andre. I haven't really seen much of Andre's nor Tommy's game, but if Tommy or his game does have more upside than Andre, then his results would speak for themselves, wouldn't they?
Again, as i mentioned earlier, i'm making as much reservation on them as i can.
- Well, IMO, INA doubles dept., esp. the MD, has never really lost its footing. They are after all, one of, if not the most dominant & consistent doubles specialists in the world.If I can generalize it to analyze other countries' juniors. Never mind.
But somehow, I can't recall the Olympic champ, MK/HS making big bang in baddie world when they're in their teens? Or say, Maria?
- True, Markis and whoever was his partner never won any big titles nor made "big bangs" when they were teens. However, it's not really a surprise. As a matter of fact, if one is to do a bit of research, one will find that most of the INA's doubles greats (Christian H., Tony G., Candra W., Sigit B., to name a few) didn't get a taste of their first major or non-major title(s) til they were in their early twenties. Roughly the same age as Markis & Hendra when they won their first major title. Markis and whoever his partner was (Hendra) won the Asian Champ and Indonesia Open when they were 21. Heck, he & his partner were the runner-ups in the Denmark Open when he was 20.
- Maria? What about her? What major, or even Open type, tourneys has she won other than finishing as a Semifinalist in last yr's OG? All of her titles have been Satellite type tourneys.
Off topic:About Taufik, I don't really just base it on his results, but also his attitude on court. He said it himself in his blog that he's enjoying his time on court a lot more these days. A good attitude towards the game never hurts! And I think his results just prove it.
Honestly, when I heard Taufik and the others weren't going to be playing, I wasn't all that surprised, or bothered. If it's ok with them, I really don't have anything to complain about do I? And Vita said she absolutely wouldn't play anyway or something didn't she?
...
- Personally, I take what Taufik say or mentioned with a grain of salt. Remember, he kinda said/mentioned the same thing before, during his 2006-2008 big tourney appearances, yet look at what happened.
I'm only concerned about result. If his current "attitude on court" has changed etc., like he said, well, let's see 'em titles, esp. SS titles, rack up by the boatload.
- Of course, the goal for every team is to win. But, again, let's look at it realistically. In this case, INA's chances.Oh boy, here we go again with the percentages.....I say INA chances to win the SC is at 30%.
Less than 50% of course (heck the only country that can boast better than 50% will be china), but most definitely nowhere near 0%!
Now.....just because one countries chances to win is less than 50%, you're saying its better to send junior players with even less chances of winning? What's that if not "lessening your chances" and "shooting yourself on the foot"??? Isn't the goal of all team is to win it??
I think we're just running in circles here...... suffice to say we agree to disagree...
Don't forget Tommy is 2 years younger than Andre. Andre also benefits from the massive support know as PB Djarum....while Tommy pretty much "orphaned" in Pelatnas, thanks to Dad.
Just like you look at results, I look at their game.....and I think Tommy has more upside than Andre (as said before, Tommy can beat Andre 3 out of 5 meet)....as long as he can work that crucial 3rd set problem.
...
If the percentage of winning it all is say @ 30% (less than 50%), w/veteran players or not, like you put it, then why don't PBSI give the younger, with some experience players a chance to perform. Rather than the same old, same old players? The younger, more experienced players have got nothing to lose & they'll gain something from being put in this type of high level team competition.
- It's fine if we agree to disagree. But i'm still looking for an explanation on why sending & playing veteran players instead of younger, somewhat experienced players will benefit the players, esp. the veteran players?
What will the veteran players gain if they're the ones being asked to play & perform? What will the younger, somewhat more experienced players gain by not given a chance to play?
- I don't really care much whether Tommy is 2 or 3 or 4 yrs younger than Andre. I haven't really seen much of Andre's nor Tommy's game, but if Tommy or his game does have more upside than Andre, then his results would speak for themselves, wouldn't they?
Again, as i mentioned earlier, i'm making as much reservation on them as i can.
Last edited:
