PDA

View Full Version : Now vs Then...


President
10-31-2009, 07:18 AM
Was the competition from 2003-2007 as strong as 2008-2009? Were the players from the earlier period just worse, or did Prime Federer make them look like his pigeons because he was so good. Are Djokovic/Murray/Nadal/Del Potro better than Hewitt/Nalbandian/Roddick/Safin? (I guess you can put Nadal in both periods, but he really only emerged as a true all courter in the latter one)

Cyan
10-31-2009, 08:11 AM
When Fed was in his prime it was a mug era with the likes of lube and flake in top 4, nuff said. No wonder Fed piled up the slams in his prime. ROTFL.

Anaconda
10-31-2009, 08:16 AM
2003 - 2007 was stronger

P_Agony
10-31-2009, 08:20 AM
When Fed was in his prime it was a mug era with the likes of lube and flake in top 4, nuff said. No wonder Fed piled up the slams in his prime. ROTFL.

Which is why guys like Haas, Roddick and Davydenko are still beating guys like Murray and Djokovic today.

I personally believe there's no big change in quality. The era was strong and continues to be as such.

jamesblakefan#1
10-31-2009, 08:38 AM
When Fed was in his prime it was a mug era with the likes of lube and flake in top 4, nuff said. No wonder Fed piled up the slams in his prime. ROTFL.

WTF Rafa won half his slams during that 'clown' era, and was owned by several of those so called mugs like Berdych, Blake, and Youzhny. What does that make Nadal? :confused:

T1000
10-31-2009, 08:46 AM
2003-2007 was much stronger. Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Nalbandian are a lot better than the clowns today

luvly
10-31-2009, 09:12 AM
the players in both groups had similar potential to win slams imo.

sh@de
10-31-2009, 06:33 PM
WTF Rafa won half his slams during that 'clown' era, and was owned by several of those so called mugs like Berdych, Blake, and Youzhny. What does that make Nadal? :confused:

It makes Nadal a leading clown :D

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
10-31-2009, 07:08 PM
03-05 was pretty decent I thought. Roddick was playing his best tennis.. Nalby was doing a hell of alot more then than he is now. Agassi was on the tail end of his career but he actually posed some good competition for Roger at the USO during those years for what it was and with Andre's age.. Moreso than what many of Fed's contemporaries was doing at the time. Safin playing reasonably well for Safin's standards. Hewitt still in his prime.

2006-Pure trash.. Roddick not playing good. Hewitt passed his prime already.. Nadal very young still finding his game. Very weak field overrall in which Fed dominated that year. I mean Ljubicic and Blake near the top as well? Undeniably a terrible field that year IMO

2007- It began to pick up here a bit. Nadal finally maturing becoming more a major all surface player than before but he was still devloping You had Djoker coming onto the scene becoming a major player.. And arguably played better tennis back around this time and 2008 then he does today.

2008-Year of Nadal.. And Murray finally becoming a major player and DJoker winning the AO beating Fed

Now you have Murray (Still trying to find his first slam but solid all year at the masters). Djoker (confidence issues but still very consistent and deadly).. Nadal who was a beast last year and looking to regain his form in 08.. Now you got Del Potro who has bursted onto the scene beating Fed at the USO and young guns like Cilic around.. I think its slightly better these days though there is stills some unproved commodities there looks to be way more of an upside with the field then in 03-07.

flyinghippos101
10-31-2009, 08:55 PM
2002-2003, Power vacume left with a bunch of 2nd rate players left to fill the void and where players like Guadio were able to win grand slams and with an old Agassi limping to get around, Fed not yet reaching his prime.

ubermeyer
11-01-2009, 11:01 AM
The beginning of Federer's prime was the strongest era ever, at that time. It has only gotten stronger.

kOaMaster
11-01-2009, 11:16 AM
I don't think there is something like a "strong" or "weak" era. maybe there are times where there are no clear favorites, no characters and dominant players, but I don't think the quality of the tennis is changing that much.

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
11-01-2009, 12:08 PM
The beginning of Federer's prime was the strongest era ever, at that time. It has only gotten stronger.

2004-05 the strongest era ever? Hewitt,Roddick, 55 year old Agassi (who still managed to be in the top 10 even passed his prime), Davydenko, Blake, Nalbandian, Ljubcic, Teenage Nadal only a phenom on clay is Number 2 in the world, Gaudio in the top 10?


ITs not too bad all in all.. But the best era ever? Please

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
11-01-2009, 12:09 PM
I don't think there is something like a "strong" or "weak" era. maybe there are times where there are no clear favorites, no characters and dominant players, but I don't think the quality of the tennis is changing that much.


Weak and Strong are subjective for sure.. But there are "weaker" and "stronger" eras. Its just the way it is, Some eras are stronger stacked with better talent at the top. Always been that way, always will be

MuseFan
11-01-2009, 12:27 PM
2006-Pure trash.. Roddick not playing good. Hewitt passed his prime already.. Nadal very young still finding his game. Very weak field overrall in which Fed dominated that year. I mean Ljubicic and Blake near the top as well? Undeniably a terrible field that year IMO


Wait, how can 2006 be pure trash when Nadal single-handedly denied Fed a CYGS at Roland Garros and beat him at 2 other clay Masters events(Monte Carlo & Rome)? It's true that in 2006, only Rafa stood up to the FedMonster.

Bjorkman & Johnny Mac
11-01-2009, 12:41 PM
Wait, how can 2006 be pure trash when Nadal single-handedly denied Fed a CYGS at Roland Garros and beat him at 2 other clay Masters events(Monte Carlo & Rome)? It's true that in 2006, only Rafa stood up to the FedMonster.

Overrall it was a pretty trashy year IMO .. Definitely field wise the worst overrall since 2002 IMO. Nadal was 19-20 year of age, Number 2 in the world, and was still mostly a just a dominant clay court player.. Thats it.. Still learning on grass, didnt do anything at the hardcourt slams.

MuseFan
11-01-2009, 12:46 PM
Overrall it was a pretty trashy year IMO .. Definitely field wise the worst overrall since 2002 IMO. Nadal was 19-20 year of age, Number 2 in the world, and was still mostly a just a dominant clay court player.. Thats it.. Still learning on grass, didnt do anything at the hardcourt slams.

Fed did have some tough matches that year in Australia(Haas), Roland Garros(Nalbandian), US Open(Roddick). Also he got a tough match in Basel semis from Srichaphan.

prosealster
11-01-2009, 04:16 PM
2003-2007 was pretty strong...it's just that fed made them look weak...fed still made all 4GS final this year eventhough he is clearly not as good as his old self...

35ft6
11-01-2009, 06:42 PM
Roddick says he is better today than when he was number 1.

Gen
11-02-2009, 02:50 AM
Was the competition from 2003-2007 as strong as 2008-2009? Were the players from the earlier period just worse, or did Prime Federer make them look like his pigeons because he was so good. Are Djokovic/Murray/Nadal/Del Potro better than Hewitt/Nalbandian/Roddick/Safin? (I guess you can put Nadal in both periods, but he really only emerged as a true all courter in the latter one)

Nalbandian and Safin - lack of discipline and determination.
Hewitt - lack of physique.
Roddick - lack of talent.

Of course, they are worse that hard-working and/or more talented Rafa, Novak and Andy. Don't know about Del Potro. Still think that his USO title was incidental.