Hewitt vs. Blake at their best

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by PascalMariaFan, Jun 10, 2008.

?

Who would win

  1. Hewitt

    74.6%
  2. Blake

    25.4%
  1. PascalMariaFan

    PascalMariaFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    249
    Do discuss.
     
    #1
  2. my_forehand

    my_forehand Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    891
    Location:
    haha.HA!
    Hewitt is a former No. 1, with 2 Grand Slams.
     
    #2
  3. PascalMariaFan

    PascalMariaFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    249
    If Nalbandian and Hewitt played at their peak, Nalbandian would beat him 1 & 1, yet he has no grand slams.

    This debate has nothing to do with achievement.
     
    #3
  4. my_forehand

    my_forehand Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    891
    Location:
    haha.HA!
    Yeh? Then why didn't Nalbanidna 1 & 1 & 1 him when he had the chance? Didn't watch Wimby 2002, but shouldn't Nalbandian be playing pretty well to beat 6 other people ina Grand Slam? He won 6 games...:? Or was it because he was too tired to finish off Malisse quickly enough (got breadsticked)?
     
    #4
  5. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Hewitt is one of the toughest opponent in his prime. Nobody wants to play him. Only Roger has a clear edge against him.
     
    #5
  6. westside

    westside Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,770
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Definately Hewitt.

    Blake would get too impatient against Hewitt
     
    #6
  7. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,552
    Location:
    Weak era
    Hewitt in his prime(2001-2005) would beat Blake on any surface IMO and thier head-to-head record proves this.
     
    #7
  8. Not fulltime player

    Not fulltime player New User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    58
    Hewitt, no doubt. When was Blake prime?, or is still to come?.
     
    #8
  9. boredone3456

    boredone3456 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,100
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    I am a James Blake fan, but Hewitt in his prime would run James around the court. I think Blake would be able to maybe get a set off of him, but win, that would be pushing it.
     
    #9
  10. beedlejuice22

    beedlejuice22 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    676
    Location:
    on the baseline
    Blake's prime was probably around the 2006 season. Hewitt definetely would have beaten him in his prime when he was winning slams. No contest.
     
    #10
  11. h7hugo

    h7hugo Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Location:
    Portugal
    Blake is no one compared to Hewitt...
     
    #11
  12. daddy

    daddy Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,686
    Location:
    Moon Balls
    Hewitt vs Blake ? Lol

    Out of form injured Hewitt can take out in form in prime Blake few times in 10 matches. In form in peak Hewitt ? Who is James Blake ?
     
    #12
  13. Banger

    Banger Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    358
    Location:
    Bergen County, NJ
    I think you guys are underestimating Blakes game at its best. I do agree that Hewitt would probably win if they played each other with their A games, but only because he is mentally superior to Blake. By no means would it be easy as some are suggesting.
     
    #13
  14. sillymonkey

    sillymonkey Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,683
    Location:
    California
    I've always been a fan of Hewitt. He gets such a bad rap, but he's got alot of soul.
    For me, Blake is boring.
     
    #14
  15. crazylevity

    crazylevity Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Blake and Hewitt at their best.....





















    were both OWNED by Federer.
     
    #15
  16. Arafel

    Arafel Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,157
    Hewitt no question. Hewitt was one of the best counterpunchers I've ever seen. Put the two against each other in their primes, watch Blake wind up and crush the ball as hard as he can and Hewitt take that pace and ram it right back down James' throat. It'd be funny.
     
    #16
  17. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    Federer and Blake were both owned by Hewitt when Hewitt was in his prime and winning grand slams from 1999 to 2003.
    Hewitt still owns Blake 7-1, and was 7-2 against Roger until Roger's breakthrough. As a matter of fact Roger said it was the match with Hewitt where he was up two sets to one with a match point and Hewitt came back to beat him that helped him get his head together.

    2007 ATP Masters Series Canada
    Canada Hard R32 Hewitt W/O
    2006 London / Queen's Club
    England Grass F Hewitt 6-4 6-4
    Stats
    2006 Las Vegas
    NV, U.S.A. Hard F Blake 7-5 2-6 6-3
    Stats
    2005 Australian Open
    Australia Hard R64 Hewitt 4-6 7-6(8) 6-0 6-3
    Stats
    2003 World Team Championship
    Dusseldorf, Germany Clay RR Hewitt 6-3 6-3
    Stats
    2002 US Open
    NY, U.S.A. Hard R32 Hewitt 6-7(5) 6-3 6-4 3-6 6-3
    Stats
    2002 Miami TMS
    FL, U.S.A. Hard R16 Hewitt 6-4 6-1
    Stats
    2001 Tokyo
    Japan Hard S Hewitt 6-4 6-0
    Stats
    2001 US Open
    NY, U.S.A. Hard R64 Hewitt 6-4 3-6 2-6 6-3 6-0

    2003 AUS v. SUI WG SF
    Melbourne, Australia Hard RR Hewitt 5-7 2-6 7-6(4) 7-5 6-1
    2002 Tennis Masters Cup
    Shanghai, China Hard S Hewitt 7-5 5-7 7-5
    Stats
    2002 Paris TMS
    France Carpet Q Hewitt 6-4 6-4
    Stats
    2002 Miami TMS
    FL, U.S.A. Hard S Federer 6-3 6-4
    Stats
    2001 's-Hertogenbosch
    The Netherlands Grass S Hewitt 6-4 6-2
    Stats
    2000 Basel
    Switzerland Carpet S Federer 6-4 5-7 7-6(6)
    Stats
    2000 Montreal / Toronto
    Toronto, Canada Hard R64 Hewitt 3-6 6-3 6-2
    Stats
    2000 AUS V SUI 1RD
    Zurich, Switzerland Carpet RR Hewitt 6-2 3-6 7-6(2) 6-1
    1999 Lyon
    France Carpet R32 Hewitt 7-6(4) 2-6 6-4
     
    #17
  18. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,552
    Location:
    Weak era
    Disagree with that,Hewitt had most consistant results in slams in 2004 and 2005,if you take Federer out of the equation those would have been Hewitt's best years.The problem Hewitt had was that Federer entered his prime in 2004 and Hewitt couldn't beat prime Fed(prime Fed Vs prime Hewitt isn't even a close match IMO).
     
    #18
  19. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    Hewitt was winning and making strides in the beginning of his career. He was an early bloomer winning Adelaide at 16, and being the tour's youngest winner. He won the US Open at 20, or 21. He was an early bloomer and in his prime he had a 7-2 edge against Roger. 2003, or 2004 Hewitt was off the tour early in the year with chicken pox and missed a few slams. He has not been the same since. But, his prime didn't start when Federer reached his prime, his prime was before.
     
    #19
  20. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,552
    Location:
    Weak era
    IMO Hewitt was still in his prime in 2004,it's just that he lost to an eventual champion in each of the 4 slams with Federer beating him in 3 of them(AO,Wimbledon,USO).He was having a great year but he couldn't beat Federer(because Federer reached his prime),for example in the summer before USO he won 2 tournaments,got to the final in Cinncinati,got to the USO final without losing a SINGLE set(he straightsetted Pim Pim in the semis who was coming off of a great win against a defending champion Roddick) but again couldn't handle Federer in the final(got double bageled).How many players can reach a slam final without losing a set(something Hewitt never did before or after in his career)while not being in their prime? My opinion is that Hewitt was still in his prime in 2004 but couldn't beat a prime Federer.
     
    #20
  21. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    OK. We'll have to agree to disagree. I think Hewitt was an early bloomer, and Roger a late bloomer.
     
    #21
  22. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    Although I agree that Roger's prime is greater than Hewitt's prime, but I can assure you that Federer wouldn't win so easily if Hewitt could display his prime tennis. Hewitt at his best has given Federer a lot of problems time and time again. Believe it or not, Federer was playing better tennis when he played prime Hewitt in 2000-2003 than he is playing right now. Yes, Federer 2008 is that bad.
     
    #22
  23. FlamEnemY

    FlamEnemY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,555
    A hard hitter versus a great counterpuncher. Even today Hewitt (injured and slowed down) will win versus Blake at his best.
     
    #23
  24. TheKingOfClay

    TheKingOfClay Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    Location:
    The Woodlands, TX
    wow a lot of Blake haters out here... I think we forget what he went through to be where he is today... I only wish I had half the heart and strength he does...
     
    #24
  25. Breaker

    Breaker Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    7,734
    That doesn't have anything to do with how Hewitt is better than Blake in nearly every way when comparing their primes.
     
    #25
  26. daddy

    daddy Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,686
    Location:
    Moon Balls
    No haters here, Blake is my favourite person on ATP but let's just say his prime is abysmal to Hewitt's. His achievements also. Thats reality, OP got it wrong.
     
    #26
  27. jmsx521

    jmsx521 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    3,496
    Assuming they are playing their best -- Blake goes for a winner on the second shot of each rally and makes it: Case closed.
     
    #27
  28. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    Hewitt at his best would absorb all of Blake's power and make Blake hit errors. Even Blake at his very best can't sustain a rally for too long. It's not fair to say that Blake at his best hits everything in with huge pace. It's just not possible.

    Would be an amazing match though.
     
    #28
  29. crazylevity

    crazylevity Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Hewitt himself said in interviews that he was a better player in 2004 and early 2005, before he had a spate of injuries.
     
    #29
  30. Ocean Drive

    Ocean Drive Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    1,714
    Very funny.
     
    #30
  31. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    Moya said he was playing better later in his career than when he won the French and got to #1, but his playing better did not come with better results. Hewitt may have felt he was playing better, but his best results came earlier in his career!
     
    #31
  32. iamke55

    iamke55 Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,084
    Because the level of play of the entire tour increases, so although Hewitt improved, the rest of the tour improved more than he did, especially Federer.
     
    #32
  33. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    Yeah, it was mainly Federer. I thought Hewitt looked tremendous in late '04/'05, back when he could actually pull off those muscle shirts, but he ran into a red-hot Safin at the Aussie and a prime Federer one too many times. It took its toll on him. He did well against everyone else, though.
     
    #33
  34. mrDamien

    mrDamien Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    2,352
    Hewitt no doubt. He could play aggresively and defensively on court. A win for him.
     
    #34
  35. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    Hewitt easily. Hewitt is the ultimate counter-puncher.
     
    #35
  36. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    As usual a classic bowl of turd from you. Hewitt was most definitely in his prime with Roger for a period. Of course Hewitt in 2004 and 2005 was in his prime when he lost to the eventual champion of all SEVEN slams he played, FIVE of those times to Federer. Do you really think an only 2-time slam winner would be capable of this outside of his prime. If it werent for Federer, Hewitt's 2004 and 2005 would have eclipsed his 2001 and 2002 probably. Of course he wasnt winning anything anymore, Federer was there to kick his butt over and over.

    Even more amusing you even count 2000 and 2003 as "prime" years for Hewitt and not 2004 and 2005? ROTFL! No 2008 Federer is not worse then 2000, 2001, or 2002 either. It is kind of better to be at absolute worst the dominant #3, then to be not even a top 50 player (Federer 2000), not even a top 10 player (Federer 2001), or not even a top 5 player (Federer 2002).
     
    #36
  37. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    To answer the question, Hewitt easily.

    Serve- not much difference
    Return of serve- Hewitt by a long shot
    Forehand- Blake
    Backhand- Hewitt
    Volleys- Hewitt
    Movement- Hewitt by a smidge
    overall defence- easily Hewitt
    Mental game- Hewitt by a mile

    No contest. Any talk of prime Hewitt getting close to prime Federer is proposterous, but likewise Hewitt at his best is clearly superior to Blake at his best. Blake is a fine player himself, he has done well to spend a couple years in the top 10 late in his career. However Hewitt is the one with 2 slams who was at #1 at one point in his career, and not Blake, for good reason.
     
    #37
  38. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,671
    Exactly, which is why Hewitt probably, and rightly so, feels the same way. But, since I consider him an early bloomer, winning at 16 and all, his earlier results were better. Grand slams, no.1, more consistent and speedier around the court!
     
    #38

Share This Page