PDA

View Full Version : Most devastating serving....


War, Safin!
07-30-2007, 08:46 AM
....in a Slam, ever?

Who, in your opinion, performed the biggest, crushing service-session in a slam?

sakabatou
07-30-2007, 09:05 AM
pete sampras

War, Safin!
07-30-2007, 09:13 AM
pete sampras
Okay....it must have taken you a long time to come up with the words 'Pete' and 'Sampras' for such an answer....so care to elaborate on your wonder-post?

avmoghe
07-30-2007, 09:14 AM
Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).


Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).

War, Safin!
07-30-2007, 09:36 AM
Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).


Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).
Which match though?
Which match stands out where you went, 'this guys serve is ON'?

I'd have to say Sampras - Agassi, Wimbledon final '99....

Gorecki
07-30-2007, 09:36 AM
somewhere between Goran & Becker (the boom boom name comes from somewhere)

Andres
07-30-2007, 09:46 AM
Which match though?
Which match stands out where you went, 'this guys serve is ON'?

I'd have to say Sampras - Agassi, Wimbledon final '99....
Ivanisevic vs Roddick, Wimbledon 2001. Nothing can be compared to that :p

You could also try Karlovic vs. Bracciali, 1st round Wimbledon 2005 (was it 2005?), The total ace count in that match was 85, I think :p

avmoghe
07-30-2007, 07:31 PM
Which match though?
Which match stands out where you went, 'this guys serve is ON'?

I'd have to say Sampras - Agassi, Wimbledon final '99....

Pick any match from Wimbledon 2001 if you like - plenty of aces to go around with even more service winners. I think Ivanisevic set the record for the number of aces in a tournament that year...

You can take the Roddick match if you like...as Roddick said, he felt helpless.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/7-6-2001-3899.asp

The Gorilla
07-30-2007, 07:48 PM
any ivanisivic match.

Fedace
07-30-2007, 07:55 PM
Mark Phillipousis, came oh so close to taking out sampras at wimbledon

DrewRafter8
07-30-2007, 07:58 PM
I don't really remember, but I think Goran hit 43 in either the finals the year he won Wimbledon or a match leading up to it. That was a wow number to me.

Jonny S&V
07-30-2007, 08:00 PM
Ivanisevic vs Roddick, Wimbledon 2001. Nothing can be compared to that :p

You could also try Karlovic vs. Bracciali, 1st round Wimbledon 2005 (was it 2005?), The total ace count in that match was 85, I think :p

87, and I was rooting for Karlovic the entire way, and yet he goes and looses.:-( He hit his 51 aces in the first 4 sets, none in the 5 set though, wierd...

keithchircop
07-31-2007, 10:30 AM
yeah all Goran had was his serve, everything else was mediocre :roll:


watch this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=F9Cx0zj5Dzk and eat your words.

Andres
07-31-2007, 10:39 AM
Or this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=RehHt96H8V4&mode=related&search= ;)

fastdunn
07-31-2007, 10:55 AM
Mark Phillipousis, came oh so close to taking out sampras at wimbledon

Philly bunted out Sampras in Australian Open 1996.
6-4, 7-6, 7-6
Ace: Philippoussis(29), Sampras(5) !

avmoghe
07-31-2007, 01:46 PM
yeah all Goran had was his serve, everything else was mediocre :roll:


watch this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=F9Cx0zj5Dzk and eat your words.


What the hell is up with this highlight = normal level of play mentality? Ivanisevic's game (aside from serve) was absolutely mediocre... and there is absolutely no denying it. I've watched Ivanisevic since 1991, and I don't need idiotic highlights to tell me how good his level of play was...watching him (and cheering him on) for ten years is far better than any youtube clips... I don't know how old you are, or how long you've been around the sport, but highlights cannot make me "eat my words"

Highlights can make just about any top 50 player look invincible. Take away his serve, and Ivanisevic would've gotten his *** handed to him by pretty much every seed (and this is on grass ..the fast grass from the 90s.. let's not even get into what would happen on the slower surfaces).

Dildor
07-31-2007, 01:50 PM
[QUOTE=Andres Guazzelli;1626074]Ivanisevic vs Roddick, Wimbledon 2001. Nothing can be compared to that :p

Pretty much. Roddick couldn't do anything. He looked like a deer caught in headlights.

Moose Malloy
07-31-2007, 02:17 PM
Ivanisevic had all the shots, but not much of a brain. He broke serve far more often than Roddick. I remember him breaking Sampras with 2 return winners, 2 clean passing shots on the run, to even the '98 W final at 2 sets all, one of the best returning games I've ever seen on fast grass. Just highlights of that one game alone would be enough to prove his game wasn't mediocre, I'm not sure of many who could do that on Sampras' 1st serve, esp on that surface.

His best results early in his career were on clay, as he got better he concentrated more on Wimbledon & got a bit careless with other aspects of his game & concentrated more on his serve. If you only watched him on grass, you may think the rest of his game was bad(since there weren't a lot of rallies back then) & when you have a serve like that, why exert yourself on return games? just swing away & only try when you get to 30-all or something.

But the rest of his game was not mediocre, he reached 3 FO QF, finalist of Hamburg(slowest of clay events), finalist of Rome, bronze medalist at '92 Barcelona Olympics.
He certainly didn't do all that with just a serve, he was no Roddick(compare their backhands, its not even close, Goran could step in & hit winners with that shot-ask Sampras or Becker, while Roddick's is pretty much a joke)

he is part of one of the alltime best points:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BqXWog14KzY

keithchircop
07-31-2007, 03:15 PM
Those "idiotic" highlights are worth as much as idiotic vids of Goran serving. You're not the only one who followed Ivanisevic. Yet it seems you only followed him at Wimbledon whereas other posters in this thread followed him on other surfaces as well. We followed him enough to know he didn't have a mediocre game, serve excluded. I'd like to see Roddick reach the final at Hamburg or Rome.

urban
07-31-2007, 03:18 PM
Yes, Goran had a very good straight return on the backhand. His problem was the next shot, the second after the return, if the ball came back. He didn't pass well, often overpowered the shot and finding the net. He was quite good on clay early in his career. Gave the superb playing Courier his hardest match in the 1992 RG quarters. I once saw a Queens final Goran vs. Flipper, when Goran, himself the big server, buckled under the onslaught of the young Australian, and sometimes -with a stunned face - turned away from the hard serves. One of the best serving i have seen came quite suprisingly from little Maroccon Hicham Arazi. Once at Hamburg on clay, he bombed out the great Muster with 4 straight clean aces in the last game.

avmoghe
07-31-2007, 09:21 PM
His best results early in his career were on clay, as he got better he concentrated more on Wimbledon & got a bit careless with other aspects of his game & concentrated more on his serve. If you only watched him on grass, you may think the rest of his game was bad(since there weren't a lot of rallies back then) & when you have a serve like that, why exert yourself on return games? just swing away & only try when you get to 30-all or something.

But the rest of his game was not mediocre, he reached 3 FO QF, finalist of Hamburg(slowest of clay events), finalist of Rome, bronze medalist at '92 Barcelona Olympics.
He certainly didn't do all that with just a serve, he was no Roddick(compare their backhands, its not even close, Goran could step in & hit winners with that shot-ask Sampras or Becker, while Roddick's is pretty much a joke)

he is part of one of the alltime best points:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BqXWog14KzY

I've watched him on every surface, not just grass. What about those accomplishments? Is that supposed to suddenly propel him past mediocrity when compared with the rest of the seeds? I completely disagree...

Here's a list of seeds that Five-O posted for 1993 Wimbledon (I'm too lazy right now to go hunt for other wimbledon seedings, so I'll borrow his seeding list..)

1. Sampras
2. Edberg
3. Courier
4. Becker
5. Ivanisevic
6. Stich
7. Lendl
8. Agassi
9. Krajicek
10. Medvedev
11. Korda
12. Chang
13. Ferreira
14. Washington
15. Novacek
16. Muster


And? You're telling me Ivanisevic is any better than mediocre among this group? Aside from possibly (not definitely.. only possibly) Korda, Washington, and Novacek - every other player there has a better ground game than Ivanisevic. This matches perfectly with what I've claimed in my first post.

He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).

I stand by this statement. Take away his serve, and Ivanisevic would've lost almost every time to the the majority of the seeds on that list.

Those "idiotic" highlights are worth as much as idiotic vids of Goran serving. You're not the only one who followed Ivanisevic. Yet it seems you only followed him at Wimbledon whereas other posters in this thread followed him on other surfaces as well. We followed him enough to know he didn't have a mediocre game, serve excluded. I'd like to see Roddick reach the final at Hamburg or Rome.
No.... I did not just follow him at Wimbledon... I followed him on hard courts and clay as well. I stand by my statment about him being mediocre in comparison to the other seeds. Pray tell which of those seeds Ivanisevic would be beating on a regular basis without his serve?

counterpunchingrules
07-31-2007, 09:26 PM
Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).


Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).

couldn't have said it better myself

keithchircop
07-31-2007, 11:45 PM
I'd still like to see Roddick reach the final at Hamburg or Rome. If all Goran had was his serve and Roddick's serve is faster than Goran's, why does Roddick constantly lose on clay against pros like Andreev and Chela? Goran made it to the final of Rome in 93 taking a set off Courier after beating Rosset and Sampras. He also made it to the final of Hamburg in 95 beating Rosset and Bruguera. Goran beating Bruguera (French Open winner in 93 and 94) on clay in 95 is like beating Nadal on clay today. Again, if Roddick's serve is faster and his opponents weaker, why isn't he making it when Goran "mediocre game, slower serve" did?

anointedone
08-01-2007, 04:52 AM
Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).


Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).

You are right. The fact Ivanisevic won a Wimbledon with a very mediocre game outside of his serve, shows how amazing his serve was.

Moose Malloy
08-01-2007, 10:08 AM
What about those accomplishments? Is that supposed to suddenly propel him past mediocrity when compared with the rest of the seeds?

Yes. When player A does well on all surfaces & player B doesn't, its a strong argument that player A is more versatile.

I stand by this statement. Take away his serve, and Ivanisevic would've lost almost every time to the the majority of the seeds on that list.


Take away Mac or Sampras' serve & they would be pretty average as well & lose to a lot of lesser players. I think its pretty silly when I hear the "take away the serve" argument(which is very common here), since its kinda an important part of the game. I've never seen(or played) a match without serving, so I can't even begin to imagine these 'hypothetical matches' you describe.

Aside from possibly (not definitely.. only possibly) Korda, Washington, and Novacek - every other player there has a better ground game than Ivanisevic.

that you think that Korda's ground game is weak among that list of seeds shows you may not have the best recollection of players from the 90s. Korda could(& did) blow away many great players strictly from the baseline, he was not a big server or attacking player at all. going by 'ground games' alone I think Korda is top 3 or 4 of those players listed. since you're way off on assessing korda, maybe your memory is a little fuzzy on Goran as well?

Goran is the only player to break Sampras twice in a Wimbledon final(Sampras was only broken 4 times total in 7 Wimbledons, he was virtually unbreakable in W finals), which shows how talented he was. Its not like Sampras just gave those games away by doubling or missing 1st serves either. Goran was more dangerous on returns than Roddick can dream of.

Goran made it to the final of Rome in 93 taking a set off Courier after beating Rosset and Sampras. He also made it to the final of Hamburg in 95 beating Rosset and Bruguera.

I think its hard to expect fans to remember how certain players played once they retire(I see so much nonsense about retired players here on a regular baseline-fans that claim Borg won Wimbledon from the baseline, that think Guga was some defensive grinder & didn't have a big serve, etc, etc)

To be fair Goran was good on clay from '90-'95 only, but great on grass/carpet until '01, so its understandable that most would only remember the more recent Goran-the one that only won on fast surfaces. However, it is interesting that Goran was one of the best claycourters in the '95 clay court season leading up to the French, considering how many more clay specialists were on tour them.

http://www.tennis28.com/studies/CW2.html

Ditto with Sampras, his backhand was very solid until '97, until he decided to become a pure S&V player & his technique on the backhand broke down. Its understandable that most fans would only remember the later version of Sampras(who had no backhand), not his earlier years, when he played differently.

It should be interesting to see what fans recall of Fed in 10 years, should he happen to change his game in his later years.

avmoghe
08-01-2007, 10:13 AM
I'd still like to see Roddick reach the final at Hamburg or Rome. If all Goran had was his serve and Roddick's serve is faster than Goran's, why does Roddick constantly lose on clay against pros like Andreev and Chela? Goran made it to the final of Rome in 93 taking a set off Courier after beating Rosset and Sampras. He also made it to the final of Hamburg in 95 beating Rosset and Bruguera. Goran beating Bruguera (French Open winner in 93 and 94) on clay in 95 is like beating Nadal on clay today. Again, if Roddick's serve is faster and his opponents weaker, why isn't he making it when Goran "mediocre game, slower serve" did?

Err... when did I mention Roddick anywhere in my posts? Roddick is utterly irrelevant to this discussion.

Why Roddick cannot succeed on clay is a separate discussion in its entirety. There are ten thousand variables to consider such as whether his serve is actually potent on clay, whether his groundstokes are poor or mediocre, mental toughness, consistency, etc.

Why Roddick cannot succeed as much as Ivanisevic on clay has absolutely nothing to do with whether his strokes were mediocre in comparison to the other seeds.

And comparing Nadal to Brugera is horrendous.. Nadal is far, far superior and far more consistent in his domination of clay.

Jonny S&V
08-01-2007, 10:24 AM
Err... when did I mention Roddick anywhere in my posts? Roddick is utterly irrelevant to this discussion.

Why Roddick cannot succeed on clay is a separate discussion in its entirety. There are ten thousand variables to consider such as whether his serve is actually potent on clay, whether his groundstokes are poor or mediocre, mental toughness, consistency, etc.

Why Roddick cannot succeed as much as Ivanisevic on clay has absolutely nothing to do with whether his strokes were mediocre in comparison to the other seeds.

And comparing Nadal to Brugera is horrendous.. Nadal is far, far superior and far more consistent in his domination of clay.

In terms of accomplishments, yes. Gamewise, they were/are on the top of their claycourt game. Beating Brugera may not be as big as beating Nadal, but it was as high of an accomplishment that Goran could have had given the depth of the clay court field then.

avmoghe
08-01-2007, 10:35 AM
Yes. When player A does well on all surfaces & player B doesn't, its a strong argument that player A is more versatile.

Who is player A here and who is player B? You lost me. Which one of those seeds represents the player other than Ivanisevic?


Take away Mac or Sampras' serve & they would be pretty average as well & lose to a lot of lesser players. I think its pretty silly when I hear the "take away the serve" argument(which is very common here), since its kinda an important part of the game. I've never seen(or played) a match without serving, so I can't even begin to imagine these 'hypothetical matches' you describe.

I suspect this is a deliberate attempt at misunderstanding my post.

Take away the serve means "replace with an average serve" (given your history here at this forum, you should be perfectly aware of this). Average in this context (comparison among seeds) refers to an average "seeded player" serve.

If Sampras had an average serve, he definitely would've succeeded a lot more than Ivanisevic if he had an average serve. The same applies to almost every single other player on that list.



that you think that Korda's ground game is weak among that list of seeds shows you may not have the best recollection of players from the 90s. Korda could(& did) blow away many great players strictly from the baseline, he was not a big server or attacking player at all. going by 'ground games' alone I think Korda is top 3 or 4 of those players listed. since you're way off on assessing korda, maybe your memory is a little fuzzy on Goran as well?
I never called his game weak.. please read my post again. I said you *might possibly* be able to argue that Ivanisevic's ground game was better than Korda.


Almost every single player on that list has blown away great players from time to time. I am astounded that anyone can claim Korda is on the top 3 or 4 on that list of seeds (strictly ground game). Agassi, Sampras, Courier, Becker... are absolutely better than Korda at the ground game.



Goran is the only player to break Sampras twice in a Wimbledon final(Sampras was only broken 4 times total in 7 Wimbledons, he was virtually unbreakable in W finals), which shows how talented he was. Its not like Sampras just gave those games away by doubling or missing 1st serves either. Goran was more dangerous on returns than Roddick can dream of.

Sorry, breaking Sampras twice in a final means nothing to me (in comparing ground games). It is not a true test of the ground game since Sampras almost always served and volleyed at wimbledon at that point (I'm assuming this is referring to the 5 setter final).

And what the hell is up with this Roddick business? I never once mentioned Roddick anywhere. Suddenly we are taking for granted that Roddick's serve is comparable to Ivanisevic's serve, and that both their games are mediocre in comparison to seeds?

avmoghe
08-01-2007, 10:39 AM
In terms of accomplishments, yes. Gamewise, they were/are on the top of their claycourt game. Beating Brugera may not be as big as beating Nadal, but it was as high of an accomplishment that Goran could have had given the depth of the clay court field then.

This is going to open up another "depth of field" argument. I'll stay away..

Either way, since you agree that beating Nadal is a bigger accomplishment than beating Brugera, the rest of the details are not worth arguing over.

federerfanatic
08-01-2007, 06:21 PM
Take away Mac or Sampras' serve & they would be pretty average as well & lose to a lot of lesser players.

I am really surprised you would say that. McEnroe was one of the best volleyers in history, and if you mean taking away his serve as in making it a much lesser serve then you could easily mean the serve of Rafter or Edberg which were not nearly as good as McEnroe's, but they still did as well as they did mostly based on just great volleying ability. McEnroe's ground game, athleticsm, returns, are all much stronger then those 2 guys as well.

I am surprised you would say that about Sampras, since you always had seemed to have a very high opinion of him game. Sampras had one of the best forehands, and was one of the best volleyers, and best athletes of his time. That would ensure he did extremely well even taking away his exceptional serve. Not nearly as dominant, and definitely nowhere near winning 14 slams, but still right near the top of the game probably, and likely nothing close to pretty average.

McEnroe and Sampras have more "game" outside the serve then Ivanisevic could dream of having. Ivanisevic could hit some great shots on various shots outside the serve, but doesnt mean he was that solid or strong in other aspects of his game. He was not nearly consistent enough for one to say that. It is easy to go for some flashy returns, groundstrokes, passing shots, etc...when you are holding so easily. That is what he did alot, and maybe the odd return game he would connect on several in a row. That doesnt mean it an accurate measure of his consistent ability in other aspects of the game.

How many times have you heard Fred Stolle, John McEnroe, Cliff Drysdale, for some examples say during a match "without his serve Goran is out to sea." or "Goran relies completely on his serve." I wish I knew how to download youtube, since I probably have it taped atleast 10 times during a particular
match (not only matches he was playing but another top player playing) when one of them would say that out of the blue. You must be well aware of this as well, since I am sure you watched matches they commentated during the time as well.

federerfanatic
08-01-2007, 06:25 PM
that you think that Korda's ground game is weak among that list of seeds shows you may not have the best recollection of players from the 90s. Korda could(& did) blow away many great players strictly from the baseline, he was not a big server or attacking player at all. going by 'ground games' alone I think Korda is top 3 or 4 of those players listed.

Sure if you made a general ranking of those players baseline games when they were all playing "very well" he would probably be there. Korda was not a consistent performer at all, and was not regularly playing his own "very good" tennis as often as most others in the top 20. On average performance he would not deserve a top 3 or top 4 baseline game of those 16, since he was too inconsistent in putting out his own "very good" tennis compared to others ranked in top 20.

vive le beau jeu !
08-07-2007, 03:35 PM
Ivanisevic had all the shots, but not much of a brain. He broke serve far more often than Roddick. I remember him breaking Sampras with 2 return winners, 2 clean passing shots on the run, to even the '98 W final at 2 sets all, one of the best returning games I've ever seen on fast grass. Just highlights of that one game alone would be enough to prove his game wasn't mediocre, I'm not sure of many who could do that on Sampras' 1st serve, esp on that surface.

His best results early in his career were on clay, as he got better he concentrated more on Wimbledon & got a bit careless with other aspects of his game & concentrated more on his serve. If you only watched him on grass, you may think the rest of his game was bad(since there weren't a lot of rallies back then) & when you have a serve like that, why exert yourself on return games? just swing away & only try when you get to 30-all or something.

But the rest of his game was not mediocre, he reached 3 FO QF, finalist of Hamburg(slowest of clay events), finalist of Rome, bronze medalist at '92 Barcelona Olympics.
He certainly didn't do all that with just a serve, he was no Roddick(compare their backhands, its not even close, Goran could step in & hit winners with that shot-ask Sampras or Becker, while Roddick's is pretty much a joke)

he is part of one of the alltime best points:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BqXWog14KzY
i can only agree with all this.

goran was definitely good on clay in the beginning of his career...
among his clay accomplishments, i'd also add he is the only player to have defeated muster in davis cup on clay, in 5 sets in 1997 (in austria, of course !). i wish i saw that 5 sets davis cup thriller... :)

and about the olympic medal at barcelona, let's mention he won 4 straight five setters (on clay !) in order to get his well deserved medal !
(i think it's a record)