PDA

View Full Version : Greatest player out of Safin, Roddick, Hewitt?


federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 04:41 PM
Out of Hewitt, Safin, and Roddick, who do you believe will go down as the greatest player of the 3 if all 3 retired today?

vive le beau jeu !
03-02-2007, 04:47 PM
in terms of career achievements, hewitt is the best.
(but i'd consider safin as a better player... when he plugs his brain, of course)

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 04:47 PM
I voted for Hewitt since I think his two year end #1s set him very much apart from Safin who has none, and vs Roddick he has both back to back year end #1s as opposed to Roddicks one and 2 slams to Roddick's 1.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 04:49 PM
in terms of career achievements, hewitt is the best.
(but i'd consider safin as a better player... when he plugs his brain, of course)


That is how I feel too. Safin when he is focused and in the zone is the player I would choose of these 3. However achievement wise it is Hewitt. Roddick has been unlucky to really hit his peak during the Federer dominance, while the other two had some of their peak before Federer took over.

dima
03-02-2007, 05:05 PM
Hewitt is the better player.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
03-02-2007, 05:12 PM
hewiit, then safin, then roddick

andy only has 1 slam, and will never win one again

stormholloway
03-02-2007, 05:20 PM
Safin is light years ahead if they're all playing their best. I think that's obvious.

E.g. : Australian Open 2005, Roddick loses to Hewitt, Hewitt loses to Safin.

Case closed. ;)

psamp14
03-02-2007, 05:25 PM
i'd go with hewitt, but stormholloway makes a point in that one time example

then again you'd have to compare titles won, and that safin has never really been consistent, so a lot of "what if" things come when you talk about him

Steven87
03-02-2007, 05:29 PM
Roddick is the most consistent out of all of them. Plus, he's only one rebounding with a come back. This board is sooooo bias against Roddick for some reason.

pNoyr3D
03-02-2007, 05:36 PM
I voted for safin! He is awesome, I love the way he plays..

Feņa14
03-02-2007, 05:38 PM
Safin is the most talented but Hewitt has achieved more, as people say.

ACE of Hearts
03-02-2007, 05:42 PM
I will say Hewitt but Safin very talented like others have mentioned.

mikhail
03-02-2007, 05:44 PM
Safin he is an entertainer and is a true champ hewitt definitly has had more sucess i just remembered something from 2000 USO if anyone remembers

Safin Won it
Hewitt Lost in The Semi's
Roddick won the junior boys USO

this all happend in US open 2000 quite funny really.

Mr. Sean
03-02-2007, 05:56 PM
Reason why I chose safin over roddick is because the only reason why safins rankings have fallen is because of knee injuries other than that hes a better player. Roddick hasnt had any serious injuires that took him out of tennis for awhile so he has no excuses other than sucking for the past 3 years. Roddick is also reverting back to his 12 foot behind baseline strategy again even though hes supposed to rush the net and is losing like crazy.

Fedace
03-02-2007, 06:10 PM
I say definitely Hewitt, Lleton Hewitt is back, he is killing Lopez right now.

alienhamster
03-02-2007, 07:56 PM
Reason why I chose safin over roddick is because the only reason why safins rankings have fallen is because of knee injuries other than that hes a better player. Roddick hasnt had any serious injuires that took him out of tennis for awhile so he has no excuses other than sucking for the past 3 years. Roddick is also reverting back to his 12 foot behind baseline strategy again even though hes supposed to rush the net and is losing like crazy. 1 slam win, 3 other slam finals w/ 3 semis at the Aussie and another semi at Wimbledon is "sucking"?

This board is SO ridiculous when it comes to assessing Roddick. I wouldn't automatically put him in front of Hewitt and Safin by any means, but he has every right to be in this conversation. He's been WAY more consistent than those guys the past three years. He lost all but two of these late slam appearances to EXACTLY ONE GUY. And who was that? Roger Federer.

Hewitt didn't have to face Fed in either of his slam wins.

Safin DID in his one Aussie win. But he's lost to a variety of not-so-great players in every other slam.

This is not a cut and dry thread question. (And therefore, a good one.)

slice bh compliment
03-02-2007, 08:02 PM
Roddick deserves some praise for sure, like Alienhamster pointed out so well.

Safin is the most fun to watch, and he's got double Andy's Slam count.

Hewitt's got a year-end Master's Cup and two Slams, too. But one of them is Wimbledon.

Davis Cup: edge to Hewitt and Safin over Andy.

I'm sayin' Hewitt overall at this point.

But going forward, I'm thinking Safin. More of the game for the future. Then again Andy's the youngest of the trio, so he will have the most time to improve his legacy. And he will be doing it for this thread right here!

Steven87
03-02-2007, 09:00 PM
Roddick has finished top 5 yearly more than any of those guys I think

SoBad
03-02-2007, 09:08 PM
Safin is the best tennis player alive. In particular, he is the best of the three that you have shortlisted.

federerfanatic
03-02-2007, 09:25 PM
1 slam win, 3 other slam finals w/ 3 semis at the Aussie and another semi at Wimbledon is "sucking"?

This board is SO ridiculous when it comes to assessing Roddick. I wouldn't automatically put him in front of Hewitt and Safin by any means, but he has every right to be in this conversation. He's been WAY more consistent than those guys the past three years. He lost all but two of these late slam appearances to EXACTLY ONE GUY. And who was that? Roger Federer.

Hewitt didn't have to face Fed in either of his slam wins.

Safin DID in his one Aussie win. But he's lost to a variety of not-so-great players in every other slam.

This is not a cut and dry thread question. (And therefore, a good one.)

I agree with alot of your points. I think an argument could be made for any of the 3 which is why I gave all 3 as options.

The biggest argument in Roddick's favor, or atleast one of them is what you said. Roddick lost alot of those late slam matches to Federer. Hewitt did some too, but his 2 slam wins he did not face Federer, Roddick did not either in his 1 slam win but his was after Federer had already won his first slam.
Safin of course you could take into consideration he beat Federer in the semis to win 1 of his 2 slams, but he didnt lose alot of opportunites late in slams to Federer or many of his fellow greatest players of this period either, often losing to players that dont fall in that category or earlier.

In Hewitt's defence while Roddick has been much more consistent substaining a very high level over the last 3 years, Hewitt substained an extremely high level 4 out of 5 years from 2001-2005. The only exception was 2003. In 2001 and 2002 he was #1 and won 1 slam each year, the year end Masters each year, and had good overall showings in slams and Masters events. In 2004 and 2005 he lost to the eventual champ in all 7 slams he played, and lost in 2 slam finals, very consistent throughout both years near the very top.
Roddick's start of substaining a very high level near the top started in 2003, so while Roddick has been more consistent substaining that very high level in the cummulation of the last few years, Hewitt started doing it before that.

tennisdude083
03-02-2007, 09:30 PM
I voted for safin! He is awesome, I love the way he plays..
yea me too yo. his backhand is sweet.

Vlad
03-02-2007, 09:36 PM
I would say that Hewitt has achieved the most obviously of those 3 guys, but Marat Safin had been the most unlucky in terms of injuries.. he had 2 career threatening injuires: one in his wrist after which he lost almost full year and his left knee after which he really wasn't the same mover for quite some time. I know most players get injuried and it is part of the game, but some can simply stay healthier than others..

at this point it goes :

1. Hewitt
2. Safin
3. Roddick

tintin
03-03-2007, 07:32 AM
Safin no doubt

BlackSheep
03-03-2007, 08:28 AM
Safin is the better player but Hewitt has done more.

Elina
03-03-2007, 09:13 AM
With accomplishments so far, Lleyton is the best of this trio. I don't see any other way to measure who is best. ;)

Pete.Sampras.
03-03-2007, 09:23 AM
Safin for sure! Hewitt on 2nd place, Roddick 3rd....

slice bh compliment
03-03-2007, 09:38 AM
Safin for sure! Hewitt on 2nd place, Roddick 3rd....

Just guessing here....Pete.Sampras.: Habla Espanol?

illkhiboy
03-03-2007, 09:46 AM
Roddick: 1 Slam win, 4 AMS wins, 3 Slam Finals, 4 Slam Semis.
Consistently ranked in the top since 2003. Has barely been out of the top 5.

Safin: 2 Slams (beating Federer and Sampras), 6 AMS wins (3 Paris), 2 Slam Finals, 1-2 Slam Semi-Final finishes. Very inconsistent, been in and out of the top 5 since entering in 2000. Very average record at the Slams outside of the Australian. Loses to lesser players very frequently.

Hewitt: 2 Slams, 2 AMS wins (both Indian Wells), 2 Year End Championship Wins, Finished number one twice, Finished in the top 5 two other times. Consistent record at the Slam, during 2004-05 lost to the eventual champ 7 times in a row. Consistent record at all Slams and on all surfaces.

I think it's a tie between Roddick and Hewitt. Time will tell who is going to be greater. Time, and health, is on Roddick's side it seems.

Turning Pro
03-03-2007, 10:04 AM
^Hewitt,Youngest ever world number 1 and most titles out of the 3 also.^

kthomas
03-03-2007, 12:56 PM
safin is one of the best players out there. he can even beat federer when he is playing well in big tournaments

callitout
03-03-2007, 06:25 PM
Both with 2 slams. Hewitt 80 weeks at #1 to Safin 9 weeks. Hewitt with 25 singles titles Safin 15.

bluescreen
03-03-2007, 07:29 PM
definately safin. he's arguably the best player on tour when he's playing his best and has 2 slams. hewitt is kinda close, but no way roddick. hewitt is more consistent, which may reason why he looks better on paper, but when safin's at his best he is way better. i think safin would be remembered more.

ACE of Hearts
03-03-2007, 07:41 PM
Safin looks good on paper but not good enough.I would take Hewitt over him.

Breaker
03-03-2007, 07:49 PM
It amazes me how many people say Marat is the best of the trio on the premise that he is better at his best than the other two, is this really so certain?

If Roddick plays his best, he beats Safin at his best because Marat will not break Andy with his serve working flawlessly.
If Hewitt plays his best he will simply absorb all of Safin's power and work the angles to consistently beat him from the baseline.

Those two arguments could be made just as well. As stated in this thread, Hewitt has 80 weeks at number 1, two year end finishes at 1 along with 2 slams (along with a doubles slam) and 2 Masters Cup wins along with an additional Masters Cup final. Also he has 25 titles, at least one every year since he turned pro, 7 straight US Open quarterfinals, US Open and Aussie Open finals, and multiple Masters Series finals to go with a great 5 set record and Davis Cup achievements.

Safin has 15 titles (though 7 were either Masters series events or Slams), 9 weeks at number 1, and one additional slam final to go with his titles. Davis Cup win last year to give him a bit more merit.

Roddick has 21 titles with 3 additional slam finals with his slam win, 4 Masters Series shields I believe along with a positive head to head with Marat. Year end number one along with finishes inside of the top 5 for the past few years, the most consistent rankings wise of the three. Great Davis Cup player as well though no results to show for it.

Hewitt above Roddick and Roddick above Safin by a hair.

Rhino
03-04-2007, 12:14 AM
Breaker I think the memory that people have in mind of Safin is when he eliminated Federer at the AO and then went on to spank Hewitt in the final. When was the last time anybody else knocked Federer out of a non-clay slam? Having said that, generally speaking Hewitt has been more consistantly better, never being outside the top 20 since....is it 01?
Nice silver fern there, are you a kiwi?

federerfanatic
03-04-2007, 04:13 AM
It amazes me how many people say Marat is the best of the trio on the premise that he is better at his best than the other two, is this really so certain?

If Roddick plays his best, he beats Safin at his best because Marat will not break Andy with his serve working flawlessly.
If Hewitt plays his best he will simply absorb all of Safin's power and work the angles to consistently beat him from the baseline.

Those two arguments could be made just as well.

I think the perceptions some have that Safin at his best automaticaly beats Roddick or Hewitt at their best are founded by the 2005 Australian Open semifinal with Federer where "some" believe he beat Federer with both at their best in a 5 set classic.

Personaly I believe:

1)Federer played fairly well in that match, nowhere near his best though, Safin was at his best. Federer was still the one who would have likely won the match as he won more points, had better stats, and Safin winning was actualy the more unlikely result based on that but it happened anyway. People saying Federer played his best and lost is just extreme excitement over seeing Federer lose a big match that was overall very played. They want to glorify to the highest extent they possibly can, and make it out to be a victorious statement of hope as high as they can, even by reaching to do that.

2)It is only one match regardless.

3)As crazy as it sounds perhaps it is not entirely impossible for Hewitt or Roddick to someday beat Federer with both playing at their best. I know that might sound crazy, but for it to happen in one match with all the times they play it does not require high odds at all.

4)Safin vs Federer as opposed to Safin vs Roddick or Safin vs Hewitt, are all different matchups. A vs B vs C is a flawed theory. How about Federer vs Nadal as opposed to Nadal vs Blake as opposed to Blake vs Federer.

haerdalis
03-04-2007, 04:17 AM
Yes hewitt has achieved most of the three. Roddick is behind Safin both in achievements and quality of play. Hewitt really dominated for a time. Roddick did so for four weeks but thats it.
Safin used to be unbeatable on his day but they didnt come often enough.

scineram
03-04-2007, 05:54 AM
Lleyton hands down. Maybe Marat over ARod.
Kudos to hops,
http://www.tennis28.com/studies/NB_Compare.html

fr600
03-04-2007, 06:42 AM
My vote for Roddick

caulcano
03-05-2007, 01:49 AM
Roddick because of some of the reasons listed, plus also, he's had to face FED in his prime.

Techniques
03-05-2007, 02:38 AM
IMO, Hewitt then Safin then Roddick. Safin, if his mind was on the job fromt he start I reckon he'd have achieved more than Hewitt. Hewitt has the runs on the board though. He is the youngest to be world number 1 ever, thats saying something. THe gam has changed and evolved ALOT though. Hewitt has done more.

TheNatural
03-05-2007, 08:07 AM
In 2005 Hewitt played like Crappola for a few of the sets and gifted Safin a few sets, Safin only played a great last set.

I dont think you can say Safin is great based on playing a bunch of good matches a year. Even Wayne Arthurs is as good as Safin when he plays his best.


Hewitt
Safin
Roddick

QUOTE=stormholloway;1288532]Safin is light years ahead if they're all playing their best. I think that's obvious.

E.g. : Australian Open 2005, Roddick loses to Hewitt, Hewitt loses to Safin.

Case closed. ;)[/QUOTE]

a guy
03-05-2007, 08:12 AM
Hewitt. He has/had consistency wheras safin has little/no consistency.

slice bh compliment
03-05-2007, 08:56 AM
In 2005 Hewitt played like Crappola ...[/quote]

Francis Ford Crappola? Yeah, he played just a notch above Francis that year. Minus the directorial vision.

johnny ballgame
03-05-2007, 09:16 AM
He's been WAY more consistent than those guys the past three years. He lost all but two of these late slam appearances to EXACTLY ONE GUY. And who was that? Roger Federer.

Hewitt didn't have to face Fed in either of his slam wins.


Whoa now, let's not pretend that Hewitt wouldn't have more slams if it wasn't for Fed. Fed knocked Hewitt out of two US Opens (once in finals, once in semis), and also twice deep in Wimbledon.

Also, don't leave out Davis Cup - hugely important to most players. All three have been great in DC, but only Hewitt and Safin have won the Cup.

DueSouth
03-05-2007, 09:32 AM
In terms of how many GS finals they have been in, they've all been in 4, and how many GS titles they've won (1,2 and 2)....Hewitt and Safin come out tops.
Roddick - Wimbledon:'04(RUP),'05(RUP) US Open:'03(W),'06(RUP)
Safin - Australian Open:'02(RUP),'04(RUP),'05(W) US Open:'00(W)
Hewitt - Australian Open:'05(RUP) Wimbledon:'02(W) US Open:'01(W),'04(RUP)

But in my opinion Safin is the best out of the three!!!!!!Davai!

stormholloway
03-05-2007, 10:18 AM
Roddick: 1 Slam win, 4 AMS wins, 3 Slam Finals, 4 Slam Semis.
Consistently ranked in the top since 2003. Has barely been out of the top 5.

Safin: 2 Slams (beating Federer and Sampras), 6 AMS wins (3 Paris), 2 Slam Finals, 1-2 Slam Semi-Final finishes. Very inconsistent, been in and out of the top 5 since entering in 2000. Very average record at the Slams outside of the Australian. Loses to lesser players very frequently.

Hewitt: 2 Slams, 2 AMS wins (both Indian Wells), 2 Year End Championship Wins, Finished number one twice, Finished in the top 5 two other times. Consistent record at the Slam, during 2004-05 lost to the eventual champ 7 times in a row. Consistent record at all Slams and on all surfaces.

I think it's a tie between Roddick and Hewitt. Time will tell who is going to be greater. Time, and health, is on Roddick's side it seems.

Huh? But Marat has more Masters titles. How can you put Roddick ahead of Safin? Safin has more slams and masters.

Whether you like it or not, the Masters titles are like baby slams. They matter more and Safin has by far the most.

lenbo01
03-05-2007, 11:43 AM
hewitt-roddick-safin.

safin is the most talented of this group, but his talent has not translated into results that put him above hewitt and roddick. i believe the title of this thread is greatest player, not most talented. even though hewitt has lost a step or two due to age and injuries, his career would have to be considered have been better than the other 2.

illkhiboy
03-05-2007, 11:54 AM
Huh? But Marat has more Masters titles. How can you put Roddick ahead of Safin? Safin has more slams and masters.

Whether you like it or not, the Masters titles are like baby slams. They matter more and Safin has by far the most.

Yeah, you make a good point. But Roddick's consistently been in the top 5, and is a genuine front-runner for Slam finals unlike Safin in recent years. When's the last time Safin made it past the 4th round of a Slam? Australian Open '05 I believe. Since then Roddick made the finals at Wimbledon, US Open and the Semi down under.

ibemadskillzz
03-05-2007, 12:24 PM
hewitt just destoryed safin. you can't call roddick a player. he just hits big serves, no weapons.

klngnbrgd
03-05-2007, 12:38 PM
Based on achievements Hewitt, then Roddick, and then Safin.

Roddick with no weapons, his serve is a pretty big weapon and he hits a few winners with his forehand. What more weapons can you ask for?

ibemadskillzz
03-05-2007, 12:41 PM
anyone in the tour can hit winners with the forehand. his forehand grip is weird, and all his strokes look horrendous including his serve.
He just has some power. You can't call him a tennis player.

tricky
03-05-2007, 02:05 PM
Yeah, this poll shouldn't really be close. Clearly Hewitt has achieved more than Safin and Roddick has and may ever will.

In terms of pure talent, Safin is ahead of Hewitt, but only in the shotmaking and service category. In his prime, Hewitt was top 2 or 3 returner and perhaps the most tenacious mover in the game. Even now, his speed when healthy is still exceptional. Mentally, he's consistently been one of the toughest in the game (save against Federer, who's just a horrible matchup for him now.) His ability to read his opponent is exceptional. He just knows where to go before the other guy does. His footwork is exceptional. In all those things, Hewitt was and is well, well ahead of Safin.

MHobbit
03-05-2007, 02:18 PM
I'd rank Safin as being better than Hewitt, who is in turn better than Roddick.

Even though Roddick has finished in the what, top 5, consistently, I don't think his style of play makes him better than the other two. His game right now is an all-power game; but, under Jimmy Connors' wing, I hope to see him improve. His results in the Grand Slams as of late is good, though.

As for Hewitt, I think his accomplishments outweigh what Roddick's done, but Roddick has more time to match and even outshine them.

I voted as Safin being the best; my reasons are pretty much because of his quality of play, aggressiveness from all of the court, and his accomplishments.

stormholloway
03-05-2007, 02:27 PM
Yeah, you make a good point. But Roddick's consistently been in the top 5, and is a genuine front-runner for Slam finals unlike Safin in recent years. When's the last time Safin made it past the 4th round of a Slam? Australian Open '05 I believe. Since then Roddick made the finals at Wimbledon, US Open and the Semi down under.

It's true. It comes down to whether consistency or results matter more. Ultimately, it seems Roddick has a better SHOT at winning titles whereas Safin simply has accrued more of them.

I just don't get Safin. When you have that kind of talent, it seems you could just hit the ball between the lines. Yet he shanks so many balls.

Moose Malloy
03-05-2007, 02:57 PM
Hewitt has obviously accomplished the most, but Roddick is the most consistent.

From summer of '03 to last summer, Roddick spent every week in the top 5. Other than Sampras or Federer that was the longest stint in the top 5 for the last 10 years.

Even his "slump" last year only consisted of him dropping out of the top 10 for 4 weeks. He doesn't get enough credit here, while safin gets far too much(injuries aside he's always been inconsistent, even when ranked top 5-losing 1st round matches etc. Roddick hardly ever lost a 1st round match in the last 4years.

check out the win/loss

safin 364-205, 64%
roddick 370-117, 76%

and roddick leads the head to head 4-3

WhiteSox05CA
03-05-2007, 03:00 PM
It's Roddick FOR SURE. Hewitt and Safin are already dead. Roddick's still fighting strong. He's also got a powerful serve to be remembered for.

Borat
03-05-2007, 03:03 PM
I am not a huge Roddick Fan like^^^^^, but I still think at this moment he is the best if they all played each other. Of course, there is the talent/ potential bid for Safin.

DashaandSafin
03-05-2007, 06:58 PM
Basically I'm going to reiterate what is said here:

Safin is the most talented, if you want to give talent the most weight.
Hewitt is the most accomplished, if you want to base this on purely accomplishments.
Roddick is the most unlucky because he is in mid career while the others are a couple of years older so an accomplishment debate really isn't so great. That and his peak coincided with Federer's peak which is extremly unlucky. Those Wimby finals and USO may have been won. Who knows?

Anyway, its a three way tie unless Andy wins one or two more slams.

federerfanatic
03-05-2007, 08:30 PM
Hewitt has obviously accomplished the most, but Roddick is the most consistent.

From summer of '03 to last summer, Roddick spent every week in the top 5. Other than Sampras or Federer that was the longest stint in the top 5 for the last 10 years.

Even his "slump" last year only consisted of him dropping out of the top 10 for 4 weeks. He doesn't get enough credit here, while safin gets far too much(injuries aside he's always been inconsistent, even when ranked top 5-losing 1st round matches etc. Roddick hardly ever lost a 1st round match in the last 4years.

check out the win/loss

safin 364-205, 64%
roddick 370-117, 76%

and roddick leads the head to head 4-3

I had no idea the win/loss % difference between Roddick and Safin was that extreme. That is a major major difference, even bigger then I imagined it would be.

I agree Safin is given too much credit by some for a couple of matches. His dominating win over a weary Sampras in the 2000 U.S Open final is referenced as proving his best is supposably "unbeatable". While Hewitt beat a weary Sampras in the 2001 U.S Open final in even more devastating fashion, not as overpowering a fashion, but even more efficiently considering the last two sets were 6-1 sets. However the latter match isnt even ever discussed or pointed out much, just that Hewitt has won a U.S Open as one of his achievements, that is all. I know Sampras was better still in 2000 then by 2001, and even more tired and flat in the 2001 final then 2000. However considering he was clearly not at his best in a physical sense in the 2000 final either, and his play in the 2001 U.S Open to reach the final was even more impressive then 2000, despite that in general as a player he was clearly still closer to his peak in 2000 then 2001, there does seem a bit of double standard for one to be constantly referenced and one completely ignored.

Also Safin beating Federer, after saving a match point, in the 2005 Australian Open semis is given as another example of Safin's best being "unbeatable". Well if one very narrow win on Safin's best surface implies this, what does Nadal beating Federer in the semis and finals in back to back years of the French Open on Nadal's best surface in more comfortable 4 setters when Federer mean? You certainly dont hear those 2 matches as implications of "unbeatable" Nadal at his best, the way you do the 2005 Australian Open semis. Yeah I know people will say clay is Federer's least excellent(I use that word since Fed is clearly excellent on every surface)but rebound ace is probably his second least excellent surface, and Safin's record there proves it is clearly his own best surface just as much as clay is Nadal's best.

That being said of course Safin's "in the zone" tennis is incredable and very hard to beat, but that doesnt just wipe out all his early round defeats even in his better years, and several years of doing pretty much nothing, injury problems or not, when compared to Hewitt and Roddick. Just my opinion though.

stormholloway
03-05-2007, 09:25 PM
Safin's best surface? That doesn't quite mean as much as clay for Nadal. It's a much more specialized surface. Rebound Ace works just fine for Roger Federer.

It's pretty well known the Australian surface doesn't really cater specifically to any certain type. It's too slow for fast court lovers and too fast for slow court lovers.

federerfanatic
03-05-2007, 09:45 PM
Safin reached 3 straight finals from 2002-2005(he defaulted before his 4th round match in 2003)at the Australian Open. For me that qualifies it as his best surface as he hasnt come close to that elsewhere.

There are different types of players then just fast court lovers and slow court lovers. Safin loves the type of bounce of rebound ace.

deme08
04-17-2008, 09:44 AM
Safin the greatest of the trio by far. Look Hewitt and Roddick are not going to get anymore slams so things looking as it is, Safin has/had the best career.

gj011
04-17-2008, 09:57 AM
Among these three Hewitt for sure. Safin is a bigger talent but never fully realized. Both have two GS titles and two GS finals. But Hewitt have 26 titles overall vs 15 for Safin. Also he was holding #1 for much longer than Safin (75 vs 9 weeks).

Roddick is far far below the other two.

el sergento
04-17-2008, 10:02 AM
1. Hewitt
2. Roddick
3. Safin

Hewitt, even taking into account the timing of his peak run (pre Fed), is by far the better competitor and given his limited abilities (due mostly to size) he deserves the most praise.

I also think people sell Roddick short, he's tough as nails, rarely blows a match and usually only looses to people he's supposed to loose too. I also think he has 1 more slam up his sleeve (AUSO probably)

Safin is by far the best player of the 3 of course, however I will never condone his gratuitous waste of talent which is matched only by Marcelo Rios.

rommil
04-17-2008, 10:04 AM
At their best Safin has the greatest talent but the question is who is the greatest PLAYER of the 3 then I say Hewitt considering his physical stature among the three and that he doesn't really have a glaring weapon in his arsenal of shots, Lleyton has achieved more and tried to develop what he can and made use of it the best possible way.

bluetrain4
04-17-2008, 10:05 AM
Definitely Hewitt. Everyone talks up Safin's physical tennis talent, which is truly extraordinary. But, focus, desire, hard work, mental engagement are real parts of the game that can't be overlooked (though they always are), and Safin's "talent" in those areas was/is often lagging.

Everyone says that he should have won more Slams. Why? He has the mind he was given, and it would be as hard to change as it would be for him to change to a 1HBH. He should have more Slams if he had Federer's mind or Agassi's later work ethic. Safin could have more slams on phyisical talent alone, but I wouldn't say "should."

Both Safin and Hewitt have 2 Slams and 2 runnerups. Hewitt has the No. 1 ranking and 2 Master's Cups, which sets him apart.

Also, Hewitt has been 14 QFs or better in Slams. Safin has 8.

Hewitt has 4 Masters Series wins (including 2 Masters Cups) and 22 SFs or better in Masters Series (including his wins).

Safin has 5 Masters Series Wins (but no Masters Cups), and just 9 SFs or better in Masters Series (including his wins).

Both have been part of 2 winning Davis Cup teams.

I but absolutely no stock in the fact that Hewitt has a Wimbledon trophy while Safin doesn't. It is true that in most people's minds (fans and media and players alike) that Wimbledon is more prestigious. Given it's history and place in the game, it would be hard disagree. But, in this day and age, it is not, in my opinion, a bigger or more difficult accomplishment to win Wimbledon than any other Slam. The fields at all the Slams are now equal with all the top players playing (which wasn't always true before) You have to win as many matches in as many days at all the Slams (which wasn't true, at least for the AO, before). So, Hewitt having a Wimbledon title, while Safin doesn't didn't factor into my decision.

Roddick is a distant third. If he were to win another Slam, then he'd be right in the discussion. His Davis Cup win helps, but the others have won it twice.

rommil
04-17-2008, 10:07 AM
That is how I feel too. Safin when he is focused and in the zone is the player I would choose of these 3. However achievement wise it is Hewitt. Roddick has been unlucky to really hit his peak during the Federer dominance, while the other two had some of their peak before Federer took over.

Well if we are going to make Federer our parameter, I think at his best Safin can beat Roger. I am not sure if I can say the same about Hewitt or Roddick.

el sergento
04-17-2008, 10:07 AM
Safin the greatest of the trio by far. Look Hewitt and Roddick are not going to get anymore slams so things looking as it is, Safin has/had the best career.

The numbers favor Hewitt. Both have 2 slams, but he has more titles and a winning record against Safin 7-6.

Mathematically Hewitt is the better player.

joeri888
04-17-2008, 10:09 AM
Roddick has had the longest time as a top 10 player. He's a consistent element in men's tennis.

Hewitt has the most victories and the biggest wins.

Safin has the most talent to be the world's best, but wasted it mostly

el sergento
04-17-2008, 10:13 AM
Safin's best surface? That doesn't quite mean as much as clay for Nadal. It's a much more specialized surface. Rebound Ace works just fine for Roger Federer.

It's pretty well known the Australian surface doesn't really cater specifically to any certain type. It's too slow for fast court lovers and too fast for slow court lovers.

The new surface favors flat aggressive play as topspin doesn't seem to be very effective on the new surface, witness Tsonga's run.

el sergento
04-17-2008, 10:36 AM
anyone in the tour can hit winners with the forehand. his forehand grip is weird, and all his strokes look horrendous including his serve.
He just has some power. You can't call him a tennis player.

I'm no Roddick fan, but this is the dumbest statement I've ever read and it reeks of troll. Roddick isn't a tennis player, give me an effen' break. Look, I'm a huge Sampras fan but I'll concede the following:

Sampras won Wimbledon with a calf injury because he relied so heavily on his serve that it didn't matter. So what, are you saying that Sampras wasn't a tennis player either?? Roddick also has, despite all the criticism, a better BH than Pete's and his ugly strokes are extremely consistent, he makes far less errors than Sampras used too. Gosh, and I thought Pete was the greatest tennis player of all time and now it turns out that my idol wasn't even a tennis player, who knew?

Oh, and Roddick's FH grip is now very common on tour and hasn't been considered weird for a good 15 years; it was considered somewhat odd when Berasategui played. Just look at the WTA; full western grips abound, welcome to the modern world.

fantom
04-17-2008, 10:55 AM
anyone in the tour can hit winners with the forehand. his forehand grip is weird, and all his strokes look horrendous including his serve.
He just has some power. You can't call him a tennis player.

hizskillzz muzz not be az mad az yourskillzz

el sergento
04-17-2008, 11:31 AM
hizskillzz muzz not be az mad az yourskillzz

Haahahahah.......I guess Roddick doesn't POWN as hard as him either.

flyer
04-17-2008, 11:53 AM
safin in his prime is by far the best and most complete player of the three, he has also achieved the most of the three

bluetrain4
04-17-2008, 11:55 AM
safin in his prime is by far the best and most complete player of the three, he has also achieved the most of the three

In what way did Safin acheive more than Hewitt?

flyer
04-17-2008, 12:00 PM
In what way did Safin acheive more than Hewitt?

They both won two slams and davis cup but safin beat sampras in one final and none other than hewitt in the other, so i guess by level of competition, you could argue wimby is more important than AO and USO but in my opinion safin beat maybe the greatest of all time and the guy hes being compared to in the final so i give the edge to him

daddy
04-17-2008, 12:06 PM
They both won two slams and davis cup but safin beat sampras in one final and none other than hewitt in the other, so i guess by level of competition, you could argue wimby is more important than AO and USO but in my opinion safin beat maybe the greatest of all time and the guy hes being compared to in the final so i give the edge to him

You can not be serious. Safin has achieved a lot but Hewitt, although clearly less talented - was a very dominant presence in one period of the tennis history and was deservably a top ranked player for almost a year and a half. They both have similar achievements ( 2 DC wins, 2 slams, 2 more GS finals, similan number of masters titles ) but this is what clearly separates them besides the fact that Hewitt has some 10 titles more to his credit. You may add a win at Wimby as one more factor that can tip to Hewitt's side.

Ps - rule out the competition factor completely. Why ? Because it is not a factor you can determine with precision. Titles and periods are. Safin did beat Federer & Sampras in his run at slams, those were two matches, nothing more.

flyer
04-17-2008, 12:12 PM
You can not be serious. Safin has achieved a lot but Hewitt, although clearly less talented - was a very dominant presence in one period of the tennis history and was deservably a top ranked player for almost a year and a half. They both have similar achievements ( 2 DC wins, 2 slams, 2 more GS finals, similan number of masters titles ) but this is what clearly separates them besides the fact that Hewitt has some 10 titles more to his credit. You may add a win at Wimby as one more factor that can tip to Hewitt's side.

Ps - rule out the competition factor completely. Why ? Because it is not a factor you can determine with precision. Titles and periods are. Safin did beat Federer & Sampras in his run at slams, those were two matches, nothing more.

ok then this factor, safin in his prime/at his best would wipe the court with hewitt in his prime/at his best, hewitt is and always was one dimensional, when safin has everything going he was downright unplayable, ask pete sampras who the better player was

Klatu Verata Necktie
04-17-2008, 12:25 PM
ok then this factor, safin in his prime/at his best would wipe the court with hewitt in his prime/at his best, hewitt is and always was one dimensional, when safin has everything going he was downright unplayable, ask pete sampras who the better player was

Didn't Pete lose to both players? Maybe I'm not remembering correctly.

daddy
04-17-2008, 12:32 PM
ok then this factor, safin in his prime/at his best would wipe the court with hewitt in his prime/at his best, hewitt is and always was one dimensional, when safin has everything going he was downright unplayable, ask pete sampras who the better player was

Turn off the emotions factor please. I will not ask Pete anything, I can see for myself. Safin had no prime, he always had a bad habit of being able to beat them all but lose to all of them. Imo this is one of the factors why I pick Hewitt, not as flashy but when he was on top, he was feared of very much. As for Safin his talent is undisputed, his stupidity also. He was feared but everyone kind of knew he will stumble somewhere on the road. He did not, twice. Good for him. He should have done it 10 times. This way Hewitt is the obvious pick, 76 weeks nr1 beats Safins less than 10 by a long range. Rankings do tell us some things, dont they?


Flyer, just a question, dont be offended. I seem to remember Hewitts days on top pretty well being that i was already watching tennis for some 12 years prior to that. I was amased how he - a guy with nothing much ( so it seemed ) was striking fear around the ATP. Safin never had that, just wondering if you do remember the same ? Safin was always 'just about to break thru .. ' and become what he never did.

93sq.
04-17-2008, 12:37 PM
I love safin...
But Hewitt at his best...is too much for Roddick..


Safin is more near...

akv89
04-17-2008, 12:38 PM
Safin's the most talented, Hewitt has the best results (although that may have been helped because his game maturing at the right time), and Roddick has been the most consistent.

bluetrain4
04-17-2008, 12:45 PM
Definitely Hewitt. Everyone talks up Safin's physical tennis talent, which is truly extraordinary. But, focus, desire, hard work, mental engagement are real parts of the game that can't be overlooked (though they always are), and Safin's "talent" in those areas was/is often lagging.

Everyone says that he should have won more Slams. Why? He has the mind he was given, and it would be as hard to change as it would be for him to change to a 1HBH. He should have more Slams if he had Federer's mind or Agassi's later work ethic. Safin could have more slams on phyisical talent alone, but I wouldn't say "should."

Both Safin and Hewitt have 2 Slams and 2 runnerups. Hewitt has the No. 1 ranking and 2 Master's Cups, which sets him apart.

Also, Hewitt has been 14 QFs or better in Slams. Safin has 8.

Hewitt has 4 Masters Series wins (including 2 Masters Cups) and 22 SFs or better in Masters Series (including his wins).

Safin has 5 Masters Series Wins (but no Masters Cups), and just 11 SFs or better in Masters Series (including his wins).

Both have been part of 2 winning Davis Cup teams.

I but absolutely no stock in the fact that Hewitt has a Wimbledon trophy while Safin doesn't. It is true that in most people's minds (fans and media and players alike) that Wimbledon is more prestigious. Given it's history and place in the game, it would be hard disagree. But, in this day and age, it is not, in my opinion, a bigger or more difficult accomplishment to win Wimbledon than any other Slam. The fields at all the Slams are now equal with all the top players playing (which wasn't always true before) You have to win as many matches in as many days at all the Slams (which wasn't true, at least for the AO, before). So, Hewitt having a Wimbledon title, while Safin doesn't didn't factor into my decision.

Roddick is a distant third. If he were to win another Slam, then he'd be right in the discussion. His Davis Cup win helps, but the others have won it twice.


I should add these stats for Roddick to make the comparisons complete.

Roddick has 14 QFs or better at Slams (8 for Safin, 14 for Hewitt)
He has 4 Master Series titles, and 17 SFs or better at Master Series events (including the Masters Cup), compared 5 MS titles and 11 SFs or better for Safin (corrected from earlier), and 4 MS titles and 22 SFs or better for Hewitt.
He has acheived the world No. 1 ranking.

Hewitt has 26 singles wins overall
Roddick has 25
Safin has 15

Someone else noted the gap between Roddick's win percentage and Safin's as well as the fact that he has been ranked in the top 10 so consistently. So, I no longer say that he is a "distant" third. I still pick Hewitt as No. 1 between these 3 players.

daddy
04-17-2008, 12:59 PM
Someone else noted the gap between Roddick's win percentage and Safin's as well as the fact that he has been ranked in the top 10 so consistently. So, I no longer say that he is a "distant" third. I still pick Hewitt as No. 1 between these 3 players.

Lets get back to the winning percentages. It is clear that Safin's winning percentage is a picture of his overall career. When he was on - which I already pointed out - he was a danger to any player, no question about that. Its just that he was off more than on, which brings me to the other two guys. Their better results in terms of going deeper ( to quarters of slams and masters ) show they were and still are consistent, especially goes for Roddick ( Hewitt is a consistant player but his level dropped somewhat while Roddick seems to be pretty much near his top potential right now ).

zagor
04-17-2008, 01:25 PM
In my opinion:
1.Hewitt
2.Roddick
3.Safin

CanadianChic
04-17-2008, 01:29 PM
I see Safin and Hewitt slowly heading out but Roddick has a long way to go.

el sergento
04-17-2008, 01:52 PM
They both won two slams and davis cup but safin beat sampras in one final and none other than hewitt in the other, so i guess by level of competition, you could argue wimby is more important than AO and USO but in my opinion safin beat maybe the greatest of all time and the guy hes being compared to in the final so i give the edge to him

As much as I hate thinking about that *** kicking, Hewitt beat Sampras in the 2001 USO final (7-1-1), right after having lost to Safin the previous year (another *** kicking by the way 4-3-3). In 2001 Sampras avenges his final loss to Safin in the Semis but then lost to Hewitt in the final. Hewitt is also the only player I can think of that bageled Sampras. If Sampras is the measuing stick then Hewitt gets the edge, although they both have winning records against poor Pete. (and to think some people still believe he'd be top 5 at 37??)

Hewitt and Safin are 7-6 life time. There's absolutely no argument that Safin has an edge career wise over him, in any way, other than a choke at the AUSO F that had more to do with Hewitt's own demons (he took the first set 1-6).

el sergento
04-17-2008, 01:56 PM
I see Safin and Hewitt slowly heading out but Roddick has a long way to go.

I agree, in the era of the mono-Fed anything is possible. Roddick is more likely to get another slam then both Hewitt or Safin.

35ft6
04-17-2008, 02:14 PM
Hewitt did more with what he had than the other two.

Safin is arguably one of the most physically gifted players in history. If you're building the perfect player, maybe his build and strokes would look like Safin's.

Roddick isn't nearly the ball striker Safin is, but he's got near Safin like power plus Hewitt's tenacity. I remember a few years ago, Roddick's forehand was bigger than Safin's groundies, and Andy was consistently dictating points.

But overall, I'd say Safin is the "greatest." Based on Grand Slams, it's Hewitt, but Safin is one of the biggest busts in tennis history and that's saying a lot considering he's a two time Grand Slam winner.

cujays
04-17-2008, 02:17 PM
safin is the best player but he cant seem to put things together ATM
hewitt is playing better i like him he gives 100% every time
roddick beat federer but its hard for me to see him winning a GS there is too many solid players

Aabye
04-17-2008, 02:33 PM
Hewitt did more with what he had than the other two.

Safin is arguably one of the most physically gifted players in history. If you're building the perfect player, maybe his build and strokes would look like Safin's.

Roddick isn't nearly the ball striker Safin is, but he's got near Safin like power plus Hewitt's tenacity. I remember a few years ago, Roddick's forehand was bigger than Safin's groundies, and Andy was consistently dictating points.

But overall, I'd say Safin is the "greatest." Based on Grand Slams, it's Hewitt, but Safin is one of the biggest busts in tennis history and that's saying a lot considering he's a two time Grand Slam winner.


yep. ten char

BigT
04-17-2008, 02:38 PM
Safin: Greatest Under Achiever
Hewitt: Greatest Over Achiever
Roddick:most Annoying, No-game-besides-serve Ever....

Q&M son
04-17-2008, 04:52 PM
Safin has more talent than the others.

quest01
04-17-2008, 04:58 PM
Right now I would go with Roddick because he has consistently been in the top 10 for almost 6 years. If it wasn't for Federer getting in the way he probably would have won a few more grand slams. You can't say the same thing about Hewitt who never faced Federer on his way to 2 slams. Safin was a good player back then but right now he is definitely the most unpredictable and overrated player on tour.

Cup8489
04-17-2008, 07:19 PM
i personally have to say that if you take each of them out of their absolute best matches, that it's really hard to decide

hewitt is amazing at counterpunching when he's on, and he would use the safin groundstroke pace to his advantage. same against roddick. roddick would have the serve against safin, and as long as he caught safin offgaurd, he'd do the 1-2 punch nicely. in long rallies, the edge would go to safin.

so in my mind, each of them at their very best would be a draw.

but i like safin the most. just because he's got all the talent in the world, and then some, but has wasted it. it's a motivator to NOT be like him :)

flyer
04-17-2008, 07:31 PM
Turn off the emotions factor please. I will not ask Pete anything, I can see for myself. Safin had no prime, he always had a bad habit of being able to beat them all but lose to all of them. Imo this is one of the factors why I pick Hewitt, not as flashy but when he was on top, he was feared of very much. As for Safin his talent is undisputed, his stupidity also. He was feared but everyone kind of knew he will stumble somewhere on the road. He did not, twice. Good for him. He should have done it 10 times. This way Hewitt is the obvious pick, 76 weeks nr1 beats Safins less than 10 by a long range. Rankings do tell us some things, dont they?


Flyer, just a question, dont be offended. I seem to remember Hewitts days on top pretty well being that i was already watching tennis for some 12 years prior to that. I was amased how he - a guy with nothing much ( so it seemed ) was striking fear around the ATP. Safin never had that, just wondering if you do remember the same ? Safin was always 'just about to break thru .. ' and become what he never did.

Hewitt was on top for longer but I measure success in slams not rankings, for the most part, obviously finishing year end number one is a great achievements and almost as good as a slam, still the poll is greatest player, not who was number one for the most weeks and i dont think you can dispute that safin at his best would beat (quite decisively) Hewitt at his best, Safin could do things Hewitt cant even dream off, so Safin was the better player

federerfanatic
04-17-2008, 07:35 PM
Hewitt did more with what he had than the other two.

Safin is arguably one of the most physically gifted players in history. If you're building the perfect player, maybe his build and strokes would look like Safin's.

Roddick isn't nearly the ball striker Safin is, but he's got near Safin like power plus Hewitt's tenacity. I remember a few years ago, Roddick's forehand was bigger than Safin's groundies, and Andy was consistently dictating points.

But overall, I'd say Safin is the "greatest." Based on Grand Slams, it's Hewitt, but Safin is one of the biggest busts in tennis history and that's saying a lot considering he's a two time Grand Slam winner.

Very well described on each.

tacou
04-17-2008, 09:53 PM
I didn't read any posts because I knew I'd get mad, but talent wise Safin is leagues ahead but as of a total career, I don't see how Andy even has competition. He's been in the top 5 for more or less 5 years while the other 2 are now floundering in nothingness.

Vlad
04-17-2008, 10:29 PM
1. Hewitt
2. Safin




3. Roddick.



Why? Because 2>1

flyer
04-17-2008, 11:11 PM
I didn't read any posts because I knew I'd get mad, but talent wise Safin is leagues ahead but as of a total career, I don't see how Andy even has competition. He's been in the top 5 for more or less 5 years while the other 2 are now floundering in nothingness.

its a good point, in terms of longevity he takes the cake by a mile, hes still one slam short of them though, if he could pick up a wimby, which i believe he might i cant see any argument for safin or hewitt

lawrence
04-17-2008, 11:33 PM
why do people use sampras as an argument to say safin > hewitt at prime?

statistically, their best results are almost equal in h2h with sampras
http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/headtohead/default.asp?playernum1=H432&playernum2=S402
http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/players/headtohead/?player1=sampras&player2=safin

superman1
04-18-2008, 12:31 AM
Pretty interesting. You've got one guy who burned brightly for a little bit and then sputtered out and is now consistently top 20, you've got another guy who is supremely talented and has come out of nowhere several times to win tournaments including 2 Slams, but is overall very inconsistent and has dropped ridiculously low in the rankings, and you've got another guy who has been very consistent, has won a lot of titles and is one of the US Davis Cup greats, but is one Slam short of the other two.

Hewitt at his prime was at another level. If their careers continue like this for the next few years, with Hewitt losing after a few rounds, Safin losing in the first round, and Roddick consistently making the quarters, semis, and finals, then I'd go with Roddick. Right now I'll pick Hewitt by a very small margin.

Actually, damn it, I want to change my vote to Roddick. At least he gave Federer plenty of good matches and was damn close to winning multiple Slams. Hewitt couldn't even get CLOSE to Federer, he couldn't even get a sniff.

pound cat
04-18-2008, 02:19 AM
safin - talent

never - say - die - Hewitt

serve - Roddick

daddy
04-18-2008, 02:31 AM
Actually, damn it, I want to change my vote to Roddick. At least he gave Federer plenty of good matches and was damn close to winning multiple Slams. Hewitt couldn't even get CLOSE to Federer, he couldn't even get a sniff.

I would say you are wrong. Actually back when Hewitt was at his top he took out Federer on a regular basis. He had a 7-2 record vs Fed until the year 2004 which is pretty good. Actually excellent. He did lose next 11 meetings but his prime went by and Federer was just achieving his.

Anyways comparing a guy with 7 wins out of 20 vs Fed to a guy with 2 wins out of 17 and saying what you said - 'he never got close to Fed comared to Roddick' is not correct. Especially having in mind that one Roddicks win came in 2003 ( along with 5 losses ) and another right now with Fed very much not in form.

Mike Bulgakov
04-18-2008, 03:01 AM
Safin reached heights during his Slam runs that Hewitt and Roddick could never match. His peak performances were amazing. Part of Safin's angst stems from his expectation of matching the heights more often and his inability to fight through the matches when his best game is not there.

Hewitt and Roddick haven't reached the heights of Safin, but they have avoided the lows. Safin is probably enjoying lunch with a model in Monte Carlo as I write, so I won't worry about his fading game.

lawrence
04-18-2008, 03:21 AM
too many safin fanboys

Ocean Drive
04-18-2008, 05:16 AM
Safin is obviously the better player, if he actually won the AO 2002 this would be case closed. But Marat is an idiot.

2003 he could have had a big year, honestly think he could have won 1 or 2 slams. Considering he was due to play Schuettler he then had to withdraw and the German obviously made the final and lost to Agassi, who Safin beat the following year.

Safins career spanned from 97 to 05, the other guys haven't had injury problems like Marat.

Safin is the best player.

Buuurnz
04-18-2008, 05:18 AM
Marat, he has the most talent of all three in addition to his titles!

Ocean Drive
04-18-2008, 05:18 AM
I would say you are wrong. Actually back when Hewitt was at his top he took out Federer on a regular basis. He had a 7-2 record vs Fed until the year 2004 which is pretty good. Actually excellent. He did lose next 11 meetings but his prime went by and Federer was just achieving his.

Anyways comparing a guy with 7 wins out of 20 vs Fed to a guy with 2 wins out of 17 and saying what you said - 'he never got close to Fed comared to Roddick' is not correct. Especially having in mind that one Roddicks win came in 2003 ( along with 5 losses ) and another right now with Fed very much not in form.

For a guy with 3k posts in 9 months you sure don't know a lot about tennis, reading from several of your posts.

One thing that glares at me is your inability to recognised injury.

You think Safin fell from number 3 in the world and lost his mobility for nothing?

KNEE INJURY ANYBODY?

roddick89
04-18-2008, 01:23 PM
i chose roddick cos i'm fan but ultimately in this sport you get judged on the number of slams you've won so its probably gonna be hewitt out of him and safin as hewitt hasnt allowed himslf to just fall away like safin has over the past 2/3 years after he won in australia. But i honetly belive roddick has a chance at wimbledon and us open this year so maybe he can at least try and equal them in those terms.

superman1
04-18-2008, 04:49 PM
I would say you are wrong. Actually back when Hewitt was at his top he took out Federer on a regular basis. He had a 7-2 record vs Fed until the year 2004 which is pretty good. Actually excellent. He did lose next 11 meetings but his prime went by and Federer was just achieving his.

Anyways comparing a guy with 7 wins out of 20 vs Fed to a guy with 2 wins out of 17 and saying what you said - 'he never got close to Fed comared to Roddick' is not correct. Especially having in mind that one Roddicks win came in 2003 ( along with 5 losses ) and another right now with Fed very much not in form.

Hewitt has been Federer's pigeon boy far more than Roddick. Roddick has gotten close, had a few matches where he was very close to winning, but Hewitt has just been spanked endlessly.

All of those wins were before Federer became dominant. Roddick's 2003 win was right after Federer won a Slam.

I would say it goes Roddick, Safin, and then Hewitt. I take a lot of points off of Hewitt for not having any longevity. I give a lot of points to Safin for winning his 2 Slams beating the 2 greatest players of all time. I give even more points to Roddick for always being right up there at the top for year after year.

lambielspins
04-18-2008, 04:51 PM
Hewitt had a win over Federer in late 2003 too. It was in Davis Cup later in the year then Roddick's win. Federer did not start to dominate until 2004.

daddy
04-18-2008, 05:35 PM
For a guy with 3k posts in 9 months you sure don't know a lot about tennis, reading from several of your posts.

One thing that glares at me is your inability to recognised injury.

You think Safin fell from number 3 in the world and lost his mobility for nothing?

KNEE INJURY ANYBODY?

Well you are surly correct about the injury part. But if we add a few more things to the equasion you should get why I wrote this. I think that although he had more than his fair share of injuries, he peaked pretty early in his career and if we take that he is around on top level for much less nine seasons, we can take away three of those due to his injuries. What about other six ? He should have definitly done more considering he is amasingly phisically gifted yet also very talented for the game.

If anything, you should have pointed out which exact part of m posts did you consider to be so wrong that they are a display of my total ignorance and made you think I dont know much about the game at all. Having been a tennis fan for the best part of 20 years, I think I am not biased when I say that hewitt is a greatest player of the three simply by what he achieved.

So please let me know where was I so wrong and we can talk about that. If the point of the post was to bash me, well, I can not reply to anything such.

daddy
04-18-2008, 05:37 PM
All of those wins were before Federer became dominant. Roddick's 2003 win was right after Federer won a Slam.

Well one of those wins of hewitt was in deed during 2003, tough match I agre but he won. In addition to that he still has 6 more wins over Fed, agreed not when he was undisputed but Roddick has the one in 2003 and another one in this year, and we all know Federers form this year.

daddy
04-18-2008, 05:48 PM
Hewitt was on top for longer but I measure success in slams not rankings, for the most part, obviously finishing year end number one is a great achievements and almost as good as a slam, still the poll is greatest player, not who was number one for the most weeks and i dont think you can dispute that safin at his best would beat (quite decisively) Hewitt at his best, Safin could do things Hewitt cant even dream off, so Safin was the better player

Safin surely was able to beat hewitt when they were both on the top of their games. But greatest does not mean who had the most potential, for me it is who had the better results.

Having a potential to do what other guy can not is not a factor. You should go out and actually do it so I can count somethign like that as a factor of who is the greatest.

slice bh compliment
04-18-2008, 05:53 PM
too many safin fanboys

Ahhhhahahah, and yet, Hewitt is leading this poll. Interesting.

zagor
04-18-2008, 06:01 PM
I would say you are wrong. Actually back when Hewitt was at his top he took out Federer on a regular basis. He had a 7-2 record vs Fed until the year 2004 which is pretty good. Actually excellent. He did lose next 11 meetings but his prime went by and Federer was just achieving his.

Anyways comparing a guy with 7 wins out of 20 vs Fed to a guy with 2 wins out of 17 and saying what you said - 'he never got close to Fed comared to Roddick' is not correct. Especially having in mind that one Roddicks win came in 2003 ( along with 5 losses ) and another right now with Fed very much not in form.

In my opinion Hewitt was still in his prime when Federer started dominating in 2004.Look at Lleyton's slam results in 2005,take Federer out of the equation(who beat him both at Wimbledon and USO) and Hewitt would have probably had the best year in his career in 2005.In my opinion Hewitt's prime was from 2001-2005,after that he went downhill in 2006 and 2007.

zagor
04-18-2008, 06:09 PM
Pretty interesting. You've got one guy who burned brightly for a little bit and then sputtered out and is now consistently top 20, you've got another guy who is supremely talented and has come out of nowhere several times to win tournaments including 2 Slams, but is overall very inconsistent and has dropped ridiculously low in the rankings, and you've got another guy who has been very consistent, has won a lot of titles and is one of the US Davis Cup greats, but is one Slam short of the other two.

Hewitt at his prime was at another level. If their careers continue like this for the next few years, with Hewitt losing after a few rounds, Safin losing in the first round, and Roddick consistently making the quarters, semis, and finals, then I'd go with Roddick. Right now I'll pick Hewitt by a very small margin.

Actually, damn it, I want to change my vote to Roddick. At least he gave Federer plenty of good matches and was damn close to winning multiple Slams. Hewitt couldn't even get CLOSE to Federer, he couldn't even get a sniff.

You could definitely make a case for Roddick,I mean the guy has been in the top 10 almost every week of the year since 2002-2003(Aside from that small blip in 2006 when he dropeed out of top 10).What was crucial for Roddick in my opinion was that Wimbledon final 2004,had he won that who knows what would happen.I'm pretty sure that Federer would still be dominating the game as he is a better player and a bad match-up for Roddick(as he can read his serve probably better than anybody) but Andy might have taken a few slams from Fed,who knows.

kabob
04-18-2008, 06:50 PM
How the hell are you homers picking Safin?? He has less than half the titles of either Hewitt or Roddick. He's never had the heart, consistency or health to put together consistent results like either of the latter two.

Hewitt, Roddick and Safin. In that order.

flyer
04-18-2008, 07:01 PM
i guess it depend how you define greatest, either way you could make a case for these players, in terms of longevity its roddick, if you measure it by achievements its hewitt with safin in a very close second, talent is absolutely safin

i know one thing though, if i had one match to win, and i could pick any player ever at their best, i would pick safin

anointedone
04-18-2008, 07:01 PM
Although I cant stand Safin and I find him ridiculously overrated by many people, for example the poster above me:

i know one thing though, if i had one match to win, and i could pick any player ever at their best, i would pick safin

PLEEEEEASSSEEE!!

One argument in his favor is that many years from now when people are bored enough to look over some of the very minor of the greats it will stand out Safin won 1 of his slams beating Sampras in the final when he was still #3 in the world, and the other of his slams beating Federer in the semis in his prime. Much bigger wins then Hewitt had to win either of his slams, or that Roddick had to win his only slam.

daddy
04-19-2008, 07:49 AM
In my opinion Hewitt was still in his prime when Federer started dominating in 2004.Look at Lleyton's slam results in 2005,take Federer out of the equation(who beat him both at Wimbledon and USO) and Hewitt would have probably had the best year in his career in 2005.In my opinion Hewitt's prime was from 2001-2005,after that he went downhill in 2006 and 2007.

Well maybe. I am no sure but you can argue that, its possible he simply ran into better oponents later and that demoralised him causing a drop in performance and rankings as of late. Similar to last couple of RG's where he lost to Nadal I think ?

Wuornos
04-20-2008, 08:16 AM
That is how I feel too. Safin when he is focused and in the zone is the player I would choose of these 3. However achievement wise it is Hewitt. Roddick has been unlucky to really hit his peak during the Federer dominance, while the other two had some of their peak before Federer took over.

I agree with this completely. I suppose a lot depends on how you define greatness.

I am not one for using total career achievement as the measure of greatness, no matter how you might measure it. For me I have to define greatness as the player who played the better quality of tennis over a sustained period.

So while agreeing with your assment of each player I would dismiss Safin given his lack of consistency. Hewitt of course achieved more but against what quality of opposition. While Roddick was unfortunate to have to compete against both Federer and Nadal.

For the same reasons as you identified but with a different definition of greatness, I would vote for Roddick as the greater of these players due to his consistency and because his lack of achievement must be tempered given the quality of the opposition he faced.

Regards

Tim

Babb
04-20-2008, 09:10 AM
I voted Hewitt.

jgreen06
04-20-2008, 03:28 PM
pure player - safin
career - hewitt

helloworld
04-29-2008, 03:55 AM
Hewitt won Wimbledon. That title alone probably puts him in a higher position than any of these guys.

my_forehand
04-29-2008, 04:15 AM
I see Safin and Hewitt slowly heading out but Roddick has a long way to go.

+1. I see Roddick winning a few more titles - maybe even a GS or a Masters, whereas I don't see any of the other two winning anything else. Plus, this year alone Roddick's won 2 titles, SF in Miami and QF in Memphis. Hewitt? QF in Adelaide.

Hewitt = 26 ATP Titles | 25 ATP Titles (and IMO counting)= Roddick

Pretty sure Roddick will at the very, very least tiethe amount; hopefully at Queens? (clay season right now so...:lol:)

I mean, Marat isn't even in the Top 80! Lleyton is what? Barely Top 20?

flyer
04-29-2008, 06:27 AM
pure player - safin
career - hewitt

simply perfect answer

Leublu tennis
04-29-2008, 06:40 AM
simply perfect answer

I agree with that. Roddick just does not seem to fit the picture of anything great.

Guru
06-25-2009, 07:56 PM
Safin's career is over now but the other two are still going strong.

I doubt Hewitt can win another Slam
but Roddick can given the right draw.

At the moment i would rank Hewitt as the best guy
but Roddick has a chance to overtake him.

alienhamster
06-25-2009, 09:15 PM
Safin's career is over now but the other two are still going strong.

I doubt Hewitt can win another Slam
but Roddick can given the right draw.

At the moment i would rank Hewitt as the best guy
but Roddick has a chance to overtake him.

Roddick needs someone else to take out Federer for him to win a slam. And he's running out of chances. He's capable of beating Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray (though not without some difficulty obviously), and those guys can all take out Fed.

grafselesfan
06-25-2009, 09:23 PM
Roddick needs someone else to take out Federer for him to win a slam. And he's running out of chances. He's capable of beating Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray (though not without some difficulty obviously), and those guys can all take out Fed.

It wont happen here at Wimbledon. Djokovic cant take out Federer on grass, and Murray is in Roddick's half.

alienhamster
06-25-2009, 09:26 PM
It wont happen here at Wimbledon. Djokovic cant take out Federer on grass, and Murray is in Roddick's half.

Yeah, that's my thinking, too. I was really hoping Fed would draw Murray in the semis. I feel like Fed almost always gets soft draws at Wimbledon for some reason.

grafselesfan
06-25-2009, 09:28 PM
Yeah, that's my thinking, too. I was really hoping Fed would draw Murray in the semis. I feel like Fed almost always gets soft draws at Wimbledon for some reason.

His draw this year to the semis is actually pretty tough, maybe the toughest of the top seeds. However Murray was his only threat before the final but now it turns out they can only meet in the final. The only scenario for Roddick to win Wimbledon this year would have been Murray taking out Federer in the semis but obviously that cant happen now.

Cenc
06-25-2009, 11:28 PM
very tough
i know who is the worst out of the 3 (by far): roddick
most successful is hewitt since he finished 2 years as world n1
however at his best safin plays the best tennis
so tough decision

Guru
06-25-2009, 11:49 PM
Yeah Roddick can't beat Federer but he can beat everyone else at his best.

Wimbledon would be the easiest for him to win
If it wasn't for Federer.

Djokovic and Murray are better on Hardcourts.

Blinkism
06-26-2009, 12:39 AM
It's a toss-up between Hewitt and Safin, for me.

I voted Hewitt because in 50 years people will probably forget Safin had potential or the quality of his best play was better than the quality of Hewitt's play and just judge the two based on the fact that Hewitt achieved more and won Wimbledon...

Safin's the more talented and complete player, technique-wise.

And Roddick's not in the running with these guys, sorry.

Turning Pro
06-26-2009, 02:13 AM
Safin's career is over now but the other two are still going strong.

I doubt Hewitt can win another Slam
but Roddick can given the right draw.

At the moment i would rank Hewitt as the best guy
but Roddick has a chance to overtake him.

Hewitt will take out Roddick in the Quarters.

roysid
06-26-2009, 02:28 AM
Rank by the category:

Headcase: Safin is way above the other two. Nearly unbeatable.

Limitations in game: Andy.

*****Hole on Court: Lleyton. Nobody can beat him in his earlier years.

Fed's whipping boy: Andy at 2-18 (Hewitt is at 7-14, Safin is at 2-8)

Wasted Talent: Safin. The most talented yet the least titles.

Guru
06-26-2009, 03:29 AM
Hewitt will take out Roddick in the Quarters.

Like at Queens :)