Better career Hewitt or Safin?

[Cesc Fabregas]

Both have 2 slams, Safin has 5 Masters shields titles whilst Hewitt has only 2, Hewitt has 2 Masters Cups though and Safin has 0 and Hewitt has 80 weeks at no.1 whilst Safin has only 9 who do you consider to have had the better career?

 

[kungfusmkim]

hewitt had a better career IMO. His domination from 2000-2002 was phenomenal. This included beating Federer. He seemed to be playing at his prime for a good amount of time where as Safin's prime is very shortlasted.

 

[aceroberts13]

I voted Hewitt, because he was more consistently dominant than was Safin. If they met each other at the top of their game I think Safin wins, but the better career goes to Hewitt.

 

[tournaking]

No doubt Hewitt had the better career but both guys are still amongst the most exciting to watch on tour.

 

[T1000]

Hewitt

They have the same number of slams and their head to head is even 7-7

Hewitt has 27 titles while Safin only has 15

Hewitt also has a significantly beter record 501-171 compared to 409-254

 

[JeMar]

Hewitt, easily.

 

[aceroberts13]

I really didn't expect this poll to be as one sided as it currently is, 11-0 for Hewitt already.

 

[fps]

safin also won the davis cup for russia as i recall in a decisive rubber, which i think is pretty huge.

they've both had great careers, but hewitt has stayed truer to his sport in terms of competitive drive and a commitment to a level of performance- the guy's still coming back from hip surgery but he won a clay tourny this year and refused to die against karlovic just moments ago, completing a massive comeback.

hewitt has absolutely achieved his potential in a way safin hasn't, and for me his 80-odd weeks at no.1 ultimately mean he's had a better career.

 

[aceroberts13]

safin also won the davis cup for russia as i recall in a decisive rubber, which i think is pretty huge.

they've both had great careers, but hewitt has stayed truer to his sport in terms of competitive drive and a commitment to a level of performance- the guy's still coming back from hip surgery but he won a clay tourny this year and refused to die against karlovic just moments ago, completing a massive comeback.

hewitt has absolutely achieved his potential in a way safin hasn't, and for me his 80-odd weeks at no.1 ultimately mean he's had a better career.

That was a huge factor in my voting as well, Hewitt got everything out of himself that he could and it payed off. Safin could have done so much more with a better work ethic.

 

[JeMar]

safin also won the davis cup for russia as i recall in a decisive rubber, which i think is pretty huge.

they've both had great careers, but hewitt has stayed truer to his sport in terms of competitive drive and a commitment to a level of performance- the guy's still coming back from hip surgery but he won a clay tourny this year and refused to die against karlovic just moments ago, completing a massive comeback.

hewitt has absolutely achieved his potential in a way safin hasn't, and for me his 80-odd weeks at no.1 ultimately mean he's had a better career.

Hewitt has also has a Davis Cup championship against Spain in 2003, but I don't think he won the decisive rubber in that match.

 

[manny pacquiao P4P king]

safin had the greater career. in the slams alone he's always beaten the number 1 player - sampras,federer,roddick.

hewitt's domination only happened bcuz the players at that time hadn't really developed (except hewitt)

 

[nfor304]

Hewitt has won the Davis cup twice, in 2003 and also in 1999 when he was 18 years old, although he lost both his singles matches to Pioline and Grosjean. The Woodies won their doubles and Philippousis won both singles to clinch the win

 

[GameSampras]

Hewitt no doubt.

 

[Breaker]

Hewitt has won the Davis cup twice, in 2003 and also in 1999 when he was 18 years old, although he lost both his singles matches to Pioline and Grosjean. The Woodies won their doubles and Philippousis won both singles to clinch the win

He may not have won in the final tie but the win over Federer in the semis essentially kept them in it and is why he gets so much credit.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Safin winning AO 2005 beating Fed in that epic match = EPIC. Hewitt beat a nobody Fed while Safin beat THE FED.

 

[GameSampras]

Safin winning AO 2005 beating Fed in that epic match = EPIC. Hewitt beat a nobody Fed while Safin beat THE FED.

Well Hewitt beat Sampras at the USO

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

Well Hewitt beat Sampras at the USO

Sampras was gassed after going through, Agassi, Rafter and Safin.

 

[GameSampras]

Sampras was gassed after going through, Agassi, Rafter and Safin.

I agree no doubt sampras was completely gassed after the 1st set. But people want to make it seems like Safin beat everyone and Hewitt beat a bunch of nobodies whether passed their prime or before their primes.


Safin didnt exactly have to beat a Prime Sampras either. Sampras by 2000 was already losing quite a bit of steam. He was 29 years old and already 6-7 years on top by that point. And he certainly wasnt what he was 4-6 years prior to that.

 

[gj011]

Safin. 10chars.

 

[P_Agony]

Safin. Sure, their results are ruoghly the same as far as slams and Masters Series/Masters Cup titles. But I think Safin will be the more remembred player, mostly because of one little tourny called AO 2005. Safin, in one of the absolute best matches in history, defeated Federer in the semi final and went on to win the whole thing.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Well Hewitt beat Sampras at the USO

So? Safin won USO over Sampras too, remember?

 

[DunlopDood]

Safin, because he can at least still play, where as I haven't heard from Hewitt in a while. Plus at the height of their powers at the AO 2005 Safin showed he was a class better in the final.

PS
I'm a huge Safin fan

 

[2ndserveace]

Tough choice, but I'm gonna have to go with Hewitt. Although I hate to say it, Hewitt was definately more consistent over his career and won just as many or more grand slams than safin (2 or more?). Safin should have had the better career, but in the end even though Safin had more talent, Hewitt was more mentally tough, and that's what it's about.

 

[fps]

Safin, because he can at least still play, where as I haven't heard from Hewitt in a while.

hewitt won a tournament a month ago, coming off hip surgery. safin hasn't won one for four years.

 

[P_Agony]

hewitt won a tournament a month ago, coming off hip surgery. safin hasn't won one for four years.

Safin is a headcase while Hewitt is rock solid in that regard.

However, a few years from now, when Safin and Hewitt are retired, who do you think tennis fans will remember more?

 

[Turning Pro]

Hewitt^ For many reasons, one of the best 5 set records, never say die attitude in them 5 set classics. Wimbledon over the Aus, 4 times winner of Queens, Youngest Ever World No.1, won his first tourny at 15 beating Agassi in final etc. So many memorable things.

 

[NamRanger]

Hewitt^ For many reasons, one of the best 5 set records, never say die attitude in them 5 set classics. Wimbledon over the Aus, 4 times winner of Queens, Youngest Ever World No.1, won his first tourny at 15 beating Agassi in final etc. So many memorable things.

Safin has more master titles.


Safin has slam wins over two of the GOAT candidates.


Safin has reached the SF of all four slams.


Safin is a threat, even today.



Safin has had a more memorable career.

 

[thalivest]

Safin is more talented by far, but I stilll have to say Hewitt. He was year end number 1 twice while Safin never was and was number 1 for a cup of coffee, he won the two biggest events in tennis, he won the biggest event outside the 4 majors twice.

 

[T1000]

Safin has more master titles.


Safin has slam wins over two of the GOAT candidates.


Safin has reached the SF of all four slams.


Safin is a threat, even today.



Safin has had a more memorable career.

Hewitt was number one twice

Hewitt was the youngest number one

Hewitt is a threat, even today

Hewitt has more match wins

Hewitt has more titles

Hewitt has a fantastic five set record

 

[Breaker]

Safin has more master titles.


Safin has slam wins over two of the GOAT candidates.


Safin has reached the SF of all four slams.


Safin is a threat, even today.



Safin has had a more memorable career.

So these are more important than...

2 years at number 1, being in top 10 all time for consecutive weeks at number 1.

2 Masters Cup titles.

Wimbledon title.

10 consecutive years winning at least one title.

Finals at 3 different slams + multiple quarterfinals at the other.

12 more titles up to now.

Other than the one win over Federer, Safin doesn't have much over Hewitt.

 

[quest01]

I'd go with Hewitt because he's had success for a longer period of time. He used to beat Federer pretty easily in the early 2000's and he has beaten Sampras several times even on grass and the 2001 US Open Final. Between the two, Hewitt has the better career.

 

[gpt]

The question was best career. Hewitt has won more prizemoney.

 

[mental midget]

it's not even a question, if we stick to the question: hewitt, by pretty much every relevant metric besides MS's, however, the 2 year end championships more than make up for that.

hewitt was a tough customer back in the day, and it's not just because everyone else sucked. great returner, great passer, and formidable off the baseline.

and fwiw, safin and hewitt at their bests would be an interesting match. i would not just hand this match over to marat, not at all.

 

[droliver]

Safin's "A-game" was a lot better and he had such a overpowering game at times. The Safin-Federer Australian Open final was one of the best played matches of the last 20 years, just a notch behind last years Wimbledon.

At the end of the day, Hewitt was just too consistant in superior results with fewer bad losses to give Safin the nod. I think Safin vs. Kafelnikov is a better debate

 

[grafselesfan]

Safin's "A-game" was a lot better and he had such a overpowering game at times. The Safin-Federer Australian Open final was one of the best played matches of the last 20 years, just a notch behind last years Wimbledon.

At the end of the day, Hewitt was just too consistant in superior results with fewer bad losses to give Safin the nod. I think Safin vs. Kafelnikov is a better debate

Kafelnikov should never rate above either Hewitt or Safin. He never even won a Masters title and won his 2 slams with joke draws. OK Hewitt did a bit too (although it included an ass whooping of Kafelnikov in 1 of the 2) but he achieved so much more overall it doesnt matter.

 

[NamRanger]

it's not even a question, if we stick to the question: hewitt, by pretty much every relevant metric besides MS's, however, the 2 year end championships more than make up for that.

hewitt was a tough customer back in the day, and it's not just because everyone else sucked. great returner, great passer, and formidable off the baseline.

and fwiw, safin and hewitt at their bests would be an interesting match. i would not just hand this match over to marat, not at all.

See Hewitt vs Safin 2005. Hewitt was pretty much stopped by Federer the whole year in nearly every major tournament. One of his best years. Safin at his best beats Hewitt, although it is a close match.

 

[grafselesfan]

Safin has a much worse head to head with Federer than Hewitt.

 

[danb]

I will have to vote Hewitt for a simple reason: I rather respect the overachiever than the underachiever.

 

[LuckyR]

Hewitt. This is so simple: Hewitt: $17,846,396 Safin: $14,091,707

 

[Max G.]

Hewitt.

The deciding factor, for me, is time at #1.

Hewitt was the clear #1 player for pretty much a full year or more. He ended as #1 twice.

Safin was only the 'best player in the world' for a very short time, like one of those fluke #1s that appears for a couple of weeks then goes away.

Sure, at his peak, Safin is a better player than Hewitt. But Safin almost never performed at his peak, whereas Hewitt was able to consistently bring that level for years. So, while Peak Safin > Peak Hewitt, overall Hewitt > Safin.