PDA

View Full Version : Im sorry but today's clay court field is a joke.


Cesc Fabregas
05-26-2009, 05:58 AM
Todays clay court field is a joke baring Nadal, Djoker and Federer. Other than those you have players like Murray, Del Potro and Verdasco who are improving on clay but more hardcourt players and then you get to clowns like Almagro, Andreev and Robredo who are supposed to be "clay court specialists" but go out early in every single big clay court event anyone else agree?

drakulie
05-26-2009, 06:00 AM
^^Yup, I agree.

Gorecki
05-26-2009, 06:09 AM
[sarcasm mode]
non-sense..

you Have Nadal, and also those others that i cant remember who lose at every other tournament while being clay specialists, then we have a few more no-one knows and seem to be great but i fail to recall(me and the rest of the boards) and all time greats like Lappenti, Daniel...

is this enough to prove the depth of clay in this era?

:)

ps: as oposed to eras suchs as Borg\Vilas..

[\sarcasm mode]

King of Aces
05-26-2009, 06:14 AM
Todays clay court field is a joke baring Nadal, Djoker and Federer. Other than those you have players like Murray, Del Potro and Verdasco who are improving on clay but more hardcourt players and then you get to clowns like Almagro, Andreev and Robredo who are supposed to be "clay court specialists" but go out early in every single big clay court event anyone else agree?

WHEN ELSE HAVE YOY EVER HAD THREE GREAT CLAY COURTERS BATTING OUT AT THE SAME TIME?

JUST LOOK AT THE LAST.....WILANDER VS A SERVE AND VOLLEYER JANICK NOAH.....WHAT SO GREAT ABOUT THAT?

Cesc Fabregas
05-26-2009, 06:18 AM
WHEN ELSE HAVE YOY EVER HAD THREE GREAT CLAY COURTERS BATTING OUT AT THE SAME TIME?

JUST LOOK AT THE LAST.....WILANDER VS A SERVE AND VOLLEYER JANICK NOAH.....WHAT SO GREAT ABOUT THAT?

Eh in the 70's there has been Borg, Panetta, Orantes playing at the same time the likes of Lendl, Wilander and Noah in the 80's and in the 90's Courier, Muster, Bruguera, Corretja and Kuerten and loads of other good clay courters in those eras.

jelle v
05-26-2009, 06:21 AM
I do agree it is weaker, but "a joke"..? I do not think it is a joke.

cknobman
05-26-2009, 06:22 AM
Eh in the 70's there has been Borg, Panetta, Orantes playing at the same time the likes of Lendl, Wilander and Noah in the 80's and in the 90's Courier, Muster, Bruguera, Corretja and Kuerten and loads of other good clay courters in those eras.

I believe Kuerten won 2 of his 3 FO grandslams in the 2000's.

Gorecki
05-26-2009, 06:23 AM
WHEN ELSE HAVE YOY EVER HAD THREE GREAT CLAY COURTERS BATTING OUT AT THE SAME TIME?

JUST LOOK AT THE LAST.....WILANDER VS A SERVE AND VOLLEYER JANICK NOAH.....WHAT SO GREAT ABOUT THAT?

why do you have to shout. do you think it will make you right?

who is janick noah? is he a caveman from mallorca?

Cesc Fabregas
05-26-2009, 06:25 AM
I believe Kuerten won 2 of his 3 FO grandslams in the 2000's.

Still won one in the 90's.

OTMPut
05-26-2009, 06:37 AM
No wonder, Nadal dominates.

vandre
05-26-2009, 06:52 AM
WHEN ELSE HAVE YOY EVER HAD THREE GREAT CLAY COURTERS BATTING OUT AT THE SAME TIME?

JUST LOOK AT THE LAST.....WILANDER VS A SERVE AND VOLLEYER JANICK NOAH.....WHAT SO GREAT ABOUT THAT?

bro, his name is Yannick Noah

Zaragoza
05-26-2009, 07:07 AM
Todays clay court field is a joke baring Nadal, Djoker and Federer. Other than those you have players like Murray, Del Potro and Verdasco who are improving on clay but more hardcourt players and then you get to clowns like Almagro, Andreev and Robredo who are supposed to be "clay court specialists" but go out early in every single big clay court event anyone else agree?

Almost everyone would look like a joke on clay next to Nadal, Federer and Djokovic. It's been a long time since we had such a strong top 3 on clay.

Aabye
05-26-2009, 07:13 AM
Let's be honest...how are you determining that this field is a joke? Because very few players have a big clay title?

Well, then the field, regardless of surface, is a joke. We have maybe ten players out there with any significant titles (GS or MS) on any surface.

But if you look at who is on top you quickly realize what the rest of the guys are up against. You have two incredible players, who would probably have gone down as at least multi-Slam winners in any era you can name. And then you have their understudies, two hungry, cocky kids who might sneak one out in any era.

There is no way you can call Federer or Nadal average; they have simply been too consistent. No "average" pro could keep up the mental strength needed to wipe the floor again and again and again like these guys have. You look at Djokovic, Murray, and Roddick-the three players who have probably suffered the worst under this domination--and you can see that had the top two not been there, they still would have had to share amongst other players.

svijk
05-26-2009, 07:46 AM
Pretty brash and thoughtless post......the current field has some really exceptional players and some good players who would have been good in prior eras as well.

Just because the exceptional bunch is consistently dominant does not mean the field is bad.

I think the OP is a joke. ;)

Nadal_Freak
05-26-2009, 08:32 AM
You got the top 3 clay players in Nadal, Djokovic, and Federer. Then you got players a level below them in Davydenko, Ferrer, Verdasco, and Del Potro. Plenty of tough matches. You are the joke here OP.

Rhino
05-26-2009, 08:53 AM
Let's be honest...how are you determining that this field is a joke? Because very few players have a big clay title?

Well, then the field, regardless of surface, is a joke. We have maybe ten players out there with any significant titles (GS or MS) on any surface.

But if you look at who is on top you quickly realize what the rest of the guys are up against. You have two incredible players, who would probably have gone down as at least multi-Slam winners in any era you can name. And then you have their understudies, two hungry, cocky kids who might sneak one out in any era.

There is no way you can call Federer or Nadal average; they have simply been too consistent. No "average" pro could keep up the mental strength needed to wipe the floor again and again and again like these guys have. You look at Djokovic, Murray, and Roddick-the three players who have probably suffered the worst under this domination--and you can see that had the top two not been there, they still would have had to share amongst other players.

I agree with this. But it is just way too complicated for the OP to grasp. He just thinks 'oh there are clay specialists that go out early, so therefore the era is weak'. Nadal and Federer would make most eras appear this way. They would have lessened the success of many of the heroes of the past. I wonder how many slams Borg would have had now if Nadal and Federer were playing in his prime. Maybe none.

thejoe
05-26-2009, 09:12 AM
WHEN ELSE HAVE YOY EVER HAD THREE GREAT CLAY COURTERS BATTING OUT AT THE SAME TIME?

JUST LOOK AT THE LAST.....WILANDER VS A SERVE AND VOLLEYER JANICK NOAH.....WHAT SO GREAT ABOUT THAT?

CAPITALS DOESN'T MAKE YOU CORRECT.

I don't believe it's weak. I think the top clay courters are just much better than everyone else. Mutual mediocrity doesn't make a strong field.

King of Aces
05-26-2009, 09:15 AM
Eh in the 70's there has been Borg, Panetta, Orantes playing at the same time the likes of Lendl, Wilander and Noah in the 80's and in the 90's Courier, Muster, Bruguera, Corretja and Kuerten and loads of other good clay courters in those eras.

Noah was a serve and volleyer

Panetta I believe was a serve and volleyer as well. Anyway he was a VERy good player but I certainly would not call him an all time great clay court player.

Borg. ...Yup you got me there.

Wilander.....yeah Ok but he was not around during Borg. So you cant say that in the same sentence

Lendl....yeah a good clay courter but no way was he better than Federer.

Courier.....he was OK....again Federer would have killed Courier.

Kuerten....yeah but wh was his competition?

Brugera, Correjta....all great clay courters...Federer would beat both.

Muster....he can't shine Nadals shoes.

thejoe
05-26-2009, 09:16 AM
Noah was a serve and volleyer

Panetta I believe was a serve and volleyer as well. Anyway he was a VERy good player but I certainly would not call him an all time great clay court player.

Borg. ...Yup you got me there.

Wilander.....yeah Ok but he was not around during Borg. So you cant say that in the same sentence

Lendl....yeah a good clay courter but no way was he better than Federer.

Courier.....he was OK....again Federer would have killed Courier.

Kuerten....yeah but wh was his competition?

Brugera, Correjta....all great clay courters...Federer would beat both.

Muster....he can't shine Nadals shoes.

Wow. Just wow. Federer better than Lendl on clay? What are you smoking?

King of Aces
05-26-2009, 09:24 AM
Wow. Just wow. Federer better than Lendl on clay? What are you smoking?

Gimme a break Lendl lost to Borg while Borg was using a wood racquet and Lendl used a graphite one.

Hell Lendl even lost to Michael Chang while he played on one leg and served underhand!

Even John Mcenroe stretched Lendl to five set at the FO....and the only reason Mac lost was because he choked and went nuts over some noise from a cameraman. What a psycho! In any event I hardly call Mcenroe "great clay court competition".

Roger would kill Ivan.


.

Spider
05-26-2009, 09:54 AM
When you have such dominating players like Federer and Nadal, what do you expect? They are world class champions and the field on clay looks weak because they are just too good. Now we can add Djokovic to that dominating list as well.

Its up to the field to raise their level to match these champions, if they can't, everyone just has to deal with it.

Rhino
05-26-2009, 09:55 AM
Hell Lendl even lost to Michael Chang while he played on one leg and served underhand!
.

That made me laugh, i had images of Chang hopping around on one leg...

veroniquem
05-26-2009, 09:56 AM
When you have such dominating players like Federer and Nadal, what do you expect? They are world class champions and the field on clay looks weak because they are just too good. Now we can add Djokovic to that dominating list as well.

Its up to the field to raise their level to match these champions, if they can't, everyone just has to deal with it.
I agree, those very dominant players make the field look worse than it actually is.

380pistol
05-26-2009, 09:57 AM
Eh in the 70's there has been Borg, Panetta, Orantes playing at the same time the likes of Lendl, Wilander and Noah in the 80's and in the 90's Courier, Muster, Bruguera, Corretja and Kuerten and loads of other good clay courters in those eras.

You forgot about Vilas in the 70's, but other than that affirmative. Outside of Nadal you have hardcourters doing well (Federer and Djokovic), then claycouert posers ...er ...uh ...I mean specialists you mentioned.

King of Aces
05-26-2009, 09:59 AM
That made me laugh, i had images of Chang hopping around on one leg...

lol....errr cramped leg. sorry.

Cesc Fabregas
05-26-2009, 02:07 PM
You got the top 3 clay players in Nadal, Djokovic, and Federer. Then you got players a level below them in Davydenko, Ferrer, Verdasco, and Del Potro. Plenty of tough matches. You are the joke here OP.

Davydenko has a few RG semis but Ferrer, Verdasco and Del Potro have never done anything on clay.

deltox
05-26-2009, 02:13 PM
Monfils will be added to that list on clay courters if he can overcome the knee problem.

and if you watch really closely especially the early rounds this week you can see some young guys who are really good at the courts, although they either lacks the experience or conditioning to compete atm.

fedtastic
05-26-2009, 02:18 PM
The presence of Nadal on the clay compensates for what ever depth the clay field is lacking. Other guys don't win as much because guys like Nadal and Federer are head and shoulders above others. If there was no Nadal, we would be calling Federer, Ferrero, Ferrer, Verdasco, Davydenko and many other players good clay courters. The fact is Nadal is one of a kind and probably the best clay courter ever. Not because the field is weak but because he is the best of the best on clay.

Tennis_Maestro
05-26-2009, 02:18 PM
Pretty brash and thoughtless post......the current field has some really exceptional players and some good players who would have been good in prior eras as well.

Just because the exceptional bunch is consistently dominant does not mean the field is bad.

I think the OP is a joke. ;)

He is. I could easily say the same for hardcourters... apart from Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Murray the rest of the field are a joke... bla bla bla .. my only addition was Murray. Same for grass courters...... Cesc is placing too much emphasis on "whos good on clay". In general there are only 4 player's that are of any great standard on any surface, not just clay. Therefore if your referring this a weak era in terms of clay, then your basically referring this a weak era in terms of tennis in general.

mandy01
05-26-2009, 02:19 PM
***********s cannot help themselves :lol:

Tennis_Maestro
05-26-2009, 02:20 PM
Oh and stop reading GameSampras's posts Cesc and develop an opinion by yourself.

deltox
05-26-2009, 02:20 PM
He is. I could easily say the same for hardcourters... apart from Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Murray the rest of the field are a joke... bla bla bla .. my only addition was Murray. Same for grass courters...... Cesc is placing too much emphasis on "whos good on clay". In general there are only 4 player's that are of any great standard on any surface, not just clay. Therefore if your referring this a weak era in terms of clay, then your basically referring this as a weak era in terms of tennis in general.

on HCs you have the likes of Roddick, Tsonga, and a few others.

Not slams mind you but masters and 500s are easily won by others, there is even upsets.

the down side to me is that on clay you can be 90% sure that the person who is supposed to win usually wins.

Cesc Fabregas
05-26-2009, 02:20 PM
He is. I could easily say the same for hardcourters... apart from Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Murray the rest of the field are a joke... bla bla bla .. my only addition was Murray. Same for grass courters...... Cesc is placing too much emphasis on "whos good on clay". In general there are only 4 player's that are of any great standard on any surface, not just clay. Therefore if your referring this a weak era in terms of clay, then your basically referring this as a weak era in terms of tennis in general.

Hardcourts have a lot of depth

Nadal
Federer
Murray
Djokovic
Roddick
Tsonga
Del Potro
Verdasco

Thats why all the best matches these days are played at the hardcourt slams.

grafselesfan
05-26-2009, 02:23 PM
***********s cannot help themselves :lol:

My impression since coming here is Cesc is a big Sampras fan, but also a big Nadal fan. So I dont think it is has anything to do with that. Just a general observation. Not everyone who posts an opinion has an alterior motive directly attached to their favorite, although I could see with the way many posters are around here why many are eager to assume that.

Cesc Fabregas
05-26-2009, 02:26 PM
My impression since coming here is Cesc is a big Sampras fan, but also a big Nadal fan. So I dont think it is has anything to do with that. Just a general observation. Not everyone who posts an opinion has an alterior motive directly attached to their favorite, although I could see with the way many posters are around here why many are eager to assume that.

Yup favourite current player Nadal past favourite Sampras.

grafselesfan
05-26-2009, 02:28 PM
Yup favourite current player Nadal past favourite Sampras.

Those are my 2 favorites of the last 15 years also. Huge fan of both. I also like Djokovic, Courier, Edberg, Ivanisevic, Krajicek alot as well though.

sh@de
05-26-2009, 05:33 PM
How is today's clay court field a joke? There's Nadal, possibly the greatest clay courter of all time. There's Federer and Djokovic behind that, both extremely adept clay courters themselves. Then you have a bunch of ppl like Monfils, Verdasco, Davydenko etc. who can be a real threat on clay as well. The clay court field is anything BUT weak...

nfor304
05-26-2009, 06:32 PM
Weak? there is Federer Nadal, Djokovic and Murray, then accomplished clay courters like Ferrer Davydenko etc and then there are the former champions in Ferrero and Gaudio. Just because they lack form at the moment doesnt diminish their past accomplishments. When you hold up players like Courier, Brugera, Noah and Chang as examples of how strong previous eras were you need to realise that they only had a couple of good years each, just like Ferrero and Gaudio, yet their pressence in the draw still makes the draw a stronger one

BigServer1
05-26-2009, 06:40 PM
Huh, this kinda seems like another dig at the current field to make the previous eras look stronger...Go figure.

okdude1992
05-26-2009, 07:42 PM
Yup favourite current player Nadal past favourite Sampras.
hmm thats interesting. would have expected a sampras fan to prefer the more classical style of federer.

grafselesfan
05-26-2009, 10:12 PM
Davydenko has a few RG semis but Ferrer, Verdasco and Del Potro have never done anything on clay.

Those guys all prefer hard courts. They will even admit so if you ask them.

grafselesfan
05-26-2009, 10:14 PM
hmm thats interesting. would have expected a sampras fan to prefer the more classical style of federer.

Maybe he is a fan of players with ultimate mental strength and guts under pressure vs their biggest rivals, something nancy boy Federer sorely lacks in comparision to both Sampras and Nadal.