Ivan Lendl picks Rafa!, Lendl would handle Roger on Clay, and Rafa Indoors

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by lendlmac, Jan 14, 2011.

  1. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    #1
  2. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,069
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Connors, Becker and Cash had his number in big matches.
     
    #2
  3. IvanAndreevich

    IvanAndreevich Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,493
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Why not take Federer from 2005 or 2006 then? Bleh.
     
    #3
  4. sunof tennis

    sunof tennis Professional

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,119
    I would definitely take Rafa on clay. Only Borg is comparable.
    I also would take Roger on hardcourts. Better forehand (especially with the variety), better serve, better volleys, etc. than Lendl.
     
    #4
  5. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,069
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Because that's prime Federer.
     
    #5
  6. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,345
    I detect a none-too-subtle Lendl dig at the state of women's tennis...

     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2011
    #6
  7. dandelion_smiley

    dandelion_smiley Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    974
    So why compare a prime 1987 Lendl to an almost 30-year old years past his prime Federer?

    You want it fair compare the best Lendl to the best Federer and I swear to God Federer would beat Ivan on every surface.
     
    #7
  8. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,984
    Doesn't matter, even 30 y/o Federer would crush Lendl on every surface. So would Rafa. The absurd notion that a player who was in his prime 23 years ago could compete, let alone beat, one of today's top player is ludicrous. This is just another case of the acute nostalgiaitis one often encounters on these forums.
     
    #8
  9. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden
    Take it easy! you guys make it sound as if Lendl said something bad about Nadal and Federer. Lendl actually respects both guys.
     
    #9
  10. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    Lendl : "Play golf, don't play tennis. Tennis is for sissies."
     
    #10
  11. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,622
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    In my opinion, Lendl in his prime years would be extremely tough to beat at the US Open. He would be aided by today's technology as well. I think he was more fit in some ways than Federer is, at the French Open for example. Federer has the edge at Wimbledon in my opinion, although the slower courts would now help Lendl, especially with current technology. On hard courts, Lendl was a very tough customer, as revealed by his record of eight straight finals at the US Open. I wonder, what current frame would he have preferred? Imagine that Lendl forehand with a 90 sq. inch frame and say a hybrid string job.

    ('85 US Open) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJfttxunpdU

    Lendl was great indoors as well.

    ('86 Masters) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3q9Y5fAdMo
     
    #11
  12. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    Volkl C-10 screams Lendl all the way imho
     
    #12
  13. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden
    #13
  14. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,649
    Location:
    Dundee
    And give Federer and Nadal the tiny racket Lendl played with and see how they get on.....
     
    #14
  15. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,649
    Location:
    Dundee
    Absurd that Lendl had to play with a tiny racket.
     
    #15
  16. pjonesy

    pjonesy Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,098
    I don't know mustard, Lendl certainly beat those guys plenty of times. But, there is some truth in your statement. Lendl did not close the deal as many times as he should have in big matches. I think that sometimes Lendl did not possess the variety to adapt to certain players in specific situations. He did win 8 majors, but maybe he should have won 10 or 11.
     
    #16
  17. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,069
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Lendl could have won a lot more than 8 majors. I mean, apart from Federer, he's appeared in more slam finals than anybody, even more than Sampras. Yet Lendl lost 11 of his 19 slam finals, including losing 6 of his first 7.

    When Connors was the right side of 32, he always beat Lendl when it mattered most. 2 US Open finals and a Wimbledon semi final, all 3 matches came soon after Lendl had beaten Connors comfortably in their previous match, even a double bagel in their previous meeting before their Wimbledon match.

    With Becker, he beat Lendl in a Wimbledon final, a US Open final, an Australian Open final, a Masters final, and 2 Wimbledon semi finals. That's a lot of big matches.

    With Cash, he beat Lendl in a Wimbledon final and 2 Australian Open semi finals, at a time when Lendl had won neither tournament before.

    We should also mention Wilander, who also had plenty of his moments over Lendl in big matches. A 17 year old Wilander beat Lendl in the 1982 French Open when Lendl was the tournament favourite. Wilander also beat Lendl in an Australian Open final, a French Open final and a US Open final.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2011
    #17
  18. Bryan Swartz

    Bryan Swartz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,751
    Since Lendl himself has said that stars of this era are better than his generation ...

    I don't think even he himself would agree with the OP.
     
    #18
  19. pjonesy

    pjonesy Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,098
    You're right. It would probably look similar to the Federer/Sampras exhibitions. Roger could serve with more variety, return just as well, hit winners off both wings from any place on the court, absorb Lendls' pace, get to net, hit volley winners, hit with more spin and hit more acute angles. Lendl would be looking to stay patient and set up for his forehand. Roger would not need to set up anything, just hit winners when he has the opening. If Lendl could keep Federer deep in the court and force him to trade shots, he would have a small chance to win some points (if Ivan was very aggressive). But, Roger also takes the ball much earlier than Lendl ever did. If anyone is going to be pinned behind the baseline, it would be Lendl.
     
    #19
  20. pjonesy

    pjonesy Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,098
    Can't argue with that. Good post.
     
    #20
  21. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,069
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I think if you gave 2011 Nadal and 2011 Federer the tennis equipment of 1986 and got them to face 1986 Lendl, Lendl would win. Likewise, if you gave 1986 Lendl the tennis equipment of 2011 and got him to face 2011 Nadal and 2011 Federer, then Nadal and Federer would win.
     
    #21
  22. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,984
    Yeah, we all know that the only factor that matters in the evolution of sports/athletes is equipment. The only reason Usain Bolt runs faster than Carl Lewis is because of his shoes.
     
    #22
  23. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,069
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    There are other reasons as well.
     
    #23
  24. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,649
    Location:
    Dundee
    What are you trying to say?
    That current rackets don't give today's players a big advantage.
    Would you say Schumacher is faster than Jim Clarke because of the car or the driver?
    Impossible to know.
    Sprinting is a far easier sport to make comparisons so your analogy is wrong IMO.
     
    #24
  25. Jchurch

    Jchurch Guest

    #25
  26. Messarger

    Messarger Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,828
    really? but some on here say that the current world number one is using a BabolaT Rocket Launcher:confused:
     
    #26
  27. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,649
    Location:
    Dundee
    haha
    10 rackets
     
    #27
  28. Jchurch

    Jchurch Guest

    I think he would use the Bosworth racket.
     
    #28
  29. pjonesy

    pjonesy Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,098
    Yeah, or a frying pan. What has happened to this thread?
     
    #29
  30. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,984
    What I'm saying is that it's not just about equipment. There are a number of other factors that contribute to the evolution of sports, including advances in coaching/training methods, biomechanics, sports medecine/physiology, nutrition, etc... Arguing that if you gave "prime" Lendl or Borg a new racket, they'd magically be able to compete at a high level against today's players is just silly.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2011
    #30
  31. pjonesy

    pjonesy Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,098
    Agree. I think you have to look at the evolution of the sport collectively, rather than just focusing on racquet technology. Comparisons like this are very subjective.
     
    #31
  32. Jchurch

    Jchurch Guest

    Beats me...... just answer a posters question he posed to the board. That is all :)
     
    #32
  33. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,649
    Location:
    Dundee
    And if you want to compare modern day players to the likes of Lendl then you have to take away those advances and imagine the player with the technology and coaching of that era.
    Of course I'm not saying it's as simple as handing Lendl a modern racket.
    Obviously you assume Lendl was brought up and playing in the modern era with modern technology, coaching, nutrition etc.
    I still maintain the racket would be the single most important factor.
    To summarise, if you want to take a modern day player back in time then you have to take modern advantages away.
    Conversely, if you want to take the likes of Lendl forward then you must give him those same advantages assuming he was brought up in that era not just plonked down with no acclimatisation.
     
    #33
  34. dandelion_smiley

    dandelion_smiley Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    974
    This sounds like anyone who won some majors before the 90's would be a threat today. The modern technology gives an advantage to EVERY player nowadays, not only Federer. I'd say that's why Federer is even more at a disadvantage cause he has to deal with guys playing various styles, you've got top spin Nadal, heavy hitting Del Potro/Soderling/Berdych, you got counterpunchers, defenders, guys playing total offence, big servers like Isner/Karlovic whilst in the 80's (and before that) everyone was more or less forced to play the same way, therefore making it easier to adjust.
     
    #34
  35. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    HUH?

    10 xanax pills now please...
     
    #35
  36. Dilettante

    Dilettante Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,108
    Location:
    Katy Perry's belly button
    I don't want to be rude but do you realize how stupid sounds that.

    You can't imagine a player with the coaching and training of another different era. Players aren't videogame characters with preset skills on a 1 to 10 scale. They are a total product of their coaching and training.

    It would make a great movie: US Army versus Roman Empire, but no airplanes or tanks or modern advantages, who would win? I tell you who doesn't win: common sense.
     
    #36
  37. shanked_it

    shanked_it Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    271


    haha, good one :D
     
    #37
  38. dandelion_smiley

    dandelion_smiley Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    974
    exactly what I said, you can do way more things now with the current racquet than with a wooden one
     
    #38
  39. Clay lover

    Clay lover Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,911
    yet some member beats the "give player X a wooden racquet and he will suck" argument to death...wonder who that is...:twisted:
     
    #39
  40. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    i agree.. there are so many more S&V's and All Courters these days... :rolleyes:
     
    #40
  41. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    LOLz :mrgreen: [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2011
    #41
  42. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    seriously, how can someone say in the full use of his intelectual faculties that today there is more variety in the game????

    i have seen some pretty stupid things form the usual suspects, but that one is most surprising!
     
    #42
  43. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    [​IMG]
     
    #43
  44. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,683
    Location:
    In The City
    Im assuming you are talking about the statements that make you go like this?
     
    #44
  45. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    i'm talikng abot those: Rafa already is GOAT, Serena Is GOAT, Sabatini More talented than Graf or Kei Nishikori is Nr. One material...


    they make me go more like this...

    [​IMG]
     
    #45
  46. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,683
    Location:
    In The City
    That happens to me when I read Nadalslamking's posts
     
    #46
  47. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,216
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    oh shut up. he can see the future! he is on par with chuck norris :)
     
    #47
  48. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    crush Lendl? Lendl's game would equate well today. he is far better than Murray, Novak, etc...he would give Fed trouble and win matches. he would be a top 5 consistent player and win a major here and there. but to say crush is laughable. he would be a much better player than the rest of the field not names rafa/roger.
     
    #48
  49. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    they all say that. if they don't, the idiots will scream. you forget Agassi did well in this era. Lendl was a better player than Agassi and the forefather to the modern game. if any player from those days (80's) could play in this era it's Lendl.
     
    #49
  50. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    the string is more important. Agassi, when he first tried poly, said this string should be illegal. the string has changed tennis. guys are mostly playing with racquets developed in the early 90's.
     
    #50

Share This Page