McEnroe in his prime would have Federer for lunch

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by djsiva, Jun 8, 2007.

  1. djsiva

    djsiva Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Most people would consider Mcenroe arrogant, but he openly admits Sampras and Federer are better than him. I seriously don't think so. McEnroe was amazing. For once McEnroe doesn't give himself enough credit. I hope he is reading this.

    No one comes close to his mastery at the net. He looked so cool coming to the net. Like Travolta in Saturday night Fever. He didn't try to overpower you. He dropped stuff nicely just right out your reach and made you look stupid. Guys would dart across the court as if to save their mom from a moving training while McEnroe would softly dump and deflect volleys left and right without even flinching. It was like he was some super hero. Watch him toy with Chang the year before Chang won the French. Mind you this way after his prime. But still there are flashes that dreams are made of. I miss those days. I would love to see him toy with Venus, Serena, or even Henin. He would make them look so stupid. Even at his age right now. I would pay $10,000 to see this. I'm sure lots of us would. All this women are too scared though.
     
    #1
  2. iamke55

    iamke55 Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,084
    Yes, and those ancient players from the 1200's would easily hold their own against McEnroe. Because you know, technique, physical ability, and racquet technology never change over time. The ancient Japanese with their Eastern FH-grip backhand would hit passing shots all day long against the modern greats effortlessly.
     
    #2
  3. Andres

    Andres G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    12,541
    Location:
    Mar del Plata, Argentina
    "Even at his age right now. I would pay $10,000 to see this. I'm sure lots of us would. All this women are too scared though."

    If John McEnroe can't even beat Marcelo Rios, what makes you think he could beat Roger Federer?
     
    #3
  4. Too Poor for Grass

    Too Poor for Grass New User

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    93
    Doubtless, McEnroe was a great volleyer, but serve-and-volley tennis isn't nearly as effective now as in years past because of the advances in racquet technology and weight training. Sampras, who was not as pronounced a serve-and-volley player as McEnroe, was able to use the technique because he had an overwhelming serve that produced fewer quality returns than almost any other player of his time. In contrast, McEnroe had a less-inspired service game, which would have been flayed by passing shots from stronger players wielding high-powered racquets.


    I thought you said he looked cool.

    He couldn't.

    He toyed with a 16-year-old kid? Doesn't sound very impressive.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2007
    #4
  5. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,670
    lol !! He may be able to beat the women easily even now, but he's gonna be bageled by Federer dude. Even in his prime, I doubt he can even win one set.
     
    #5
  6. Mick

    Mick Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,362
    McEnroe did not fare too well against Lendl and Federer is a much better striker of the ball than Lendl in my humble opinion.
     
    #6
  7. Jet Rink

    Jet Rink Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    677
    You are sadly mistaken. Mac's service game was one of the best and most effective ever.

    Jet
     
    #7
  8. Heavy Metal Tennis Star

    Heavy Metal Tennis Star Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,162
    Location:
    U.S. And A.
    umm no, federer is wayyy better and he has class.
     
    #8
  9. zapvor

    zapvor Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    9,132
    Location:
    tennis courts
    what????! thats teh WTA....did yuo lose your train of thought
     
    #9
  10. rommil

    rommil Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    7,736
    Location:
    CT
    Maybe if the implication that Johnny Mac might be a cannibal, your post title might have bearing and you might have slight chance of argument.
     
    #10
  11. dima

    dima Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    727
    I LOLed. Good job.
     
    #11
  12. tkauffm

    tkauffm Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    105
    Location:
    Oregon
    You're joking right?
     
    #12
  13. jukka1970

    jukka1970 Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,068
    This is an easy one to answer. I've bold printed and underlined the answer which is provided within your original post.

    As for your thoughts, what you're basically saying is that you know more about John McEnroe, then John McEnroe knows about himself.

    Jukka
     
    #13
  14. armand

    armand Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,747
    Location:
    RDS001 90: SPPP 1.18 @ 63/61
    McEnroe hasn't got a wrist! How he competed(and won) with no wrist is a miracle in itself. But to compete with GOATs without a wrist would be tougher than climbing Mt Everest with no oxygen, no socks and no Sherpas.
     
    #14
  15. Dolphina

    Dolphina New User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    43
    If you´re not a power player, you have to create a body like Nadal to beat him or count on Roger making a lot of errors. Otherwise you will be smoked relentlessly.
     
    #15
  16. TENNIS_99

    TENNIS_99 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    440
    Federer will win almost all his service games easily because whenever Mac is in the backcourt, the rally would not last more than 3-5 exchanges. Mac in his prime has one of the nastiest serve,will still have quite effective SV. But the return comes back faster and dropping faster so he would have more errors here and there and, you have the results.
     
    #16
  17. forzainter

    forzainter Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    764
    Location:
    Scotland
    i wouldnt take anything this guy says seriously, just look at his avatar


    just joking, but bad choice in my opinion
     
    #17
  18. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,571
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Federer wins 7/10.

    But...

    Give 'em both wood and McEnroe wins 7/10.

    So, I agree the equipment makes a bigger difference.

    McEnroe's technique translates just fine to a larger headed frame. I'm not so sure that Federer's angle of attack on the ball would translate as well to a wooden frame.

    McEnroe in his 1984 incarnation was about as good as a tennis player gets. In any of his others years, FedEx would probably run over him like a pickup truck over a rooster.
     
    #18
  19. tintin

    tintin Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,438
    Location:
    none of your damn business
    pardon me while I :lol: :lol: my arse off at that post
    thanks for the :lol: :lol: mate
     
    #19
  20. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    DOnt worrt too much about McEnroe and Federer. They are not in same league. Federer has a well rounded game than McEnroe and Federer doesnt fall for McEnroe's tantrums.

    McEnroe got far more credit than what due for him (eg: IvanLendl is no less player with far more better results but often considered inferior to McEnroe).

    In short, McEnroe is no match for Federer. Even thought sampras isnt in his prime exactly, Federer beat sampras in their only match... Well you get the idea!

    Remember another great player Andre Kirk Agassi?. He holds a 2-2 record against Mcenroe. We all know what Agassi had against Federer.

    I am going to throw this. Nadal would eat McEnroe for Lunch !!!!
     
    #20
  21. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Here come the stupid trolls with a handful of posts with their retarded agenda.

    McEnroe at his peak (probably '84) may have been the greatest tennis player ever. All you have to do is watch some tennis. No one could match his touch. Ever.

    As for the whole Lendl thing, Mac owned Lendl until he married and burned out. Mac had his 5 years of superstardom. Lendl followed up with his own.
     
    #21
  22. omniexist

    omniexist Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    Messages:
    560
    I'm not getting what you're saying here. If anything, McEnroe was nothing but wrist...
     
    #22
  23. Too Poor for Grass

    Too Poor for Grass New User

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    93
    What I said is that it wasn't as good as Sampras's, and in today's game, if you're not serving 125+, you're not going to be able to win major tournaments with a serve-and-volley game.
     
    #23
  24. diggler

    diggler Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,174
    Location:
    Sydney
    This post is the best one on this topic. It is all about specifics.

    2007, modern rackets on any surface, Mac would get flogged due to inferior groundstrokes.

    Transport Federer back to 1984 using the equipment of the time and I think it would be very close on any surface. Don't forget Mac was 2 sets up against Lendl in the French final.
     
    #24
  25. Too Poor for Grass

    Too Poor for Grass New User

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    93
    Well, wait a minute. You just said:

    (1) that McEnroe was "probably" at his peak in 1984; and
    (2) that McEnroe "owned" Lendl until he burned out.


    But McEnroe lost to Lendl in the 1984 French final, did he not? How can you attribute Lendl's superior record solely to McEnroe's burnout if Lendl beat McEnroe at the latter's supposed peak?
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2007
    #25
  26. Craig Sheppard

    Craig Sheppard Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,361
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    Glad I'm going to watch a Pete v. Mac exhibition match in July! Pete's going to wipe the floor w/ Mac is my guess.
     
    #26
  27. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476

    Some poster mentioned Burn out. Somehow it is supposed to be Lendl's problem?. McEnroe had his little bit of time and then others started beating him. May be for those posters, McEnroe is the greatest of all the time (better than Sampras, Bill tanden, Andre Agassi) . Couldnt even manage to win a FrenchOpen but poses as if he won Grandslam every year he touched the racquet.
     
    #27
  28. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    So lets not forget that mac was 2 sets up. Being a great player he is, why did he loose?. If anything in such situations Great players will not let someone else dominate them.

    How many times have we seen Sampras or the likes 2 sets up and then loose a Grandslam final.
     
    #28
  29. diggler

    diggler Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,174
    Location:
    Sydney

    This is very unfair on Mac. He is a serve volleyer on his worst surface playing Lendl on his best surface. Sampras never made a French Final let alone led Lendl 2 sets to love.

    In 1984, Mac had the highest winning percentage ever (Federer would have beaten it if he didn't lose the Masters final while injured in 2005. After leading 2 sets to love by the way)

    Mac lost only 3 matches that year and you're going to give him grief for losing the French Open Final. That's a bit rich.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McEnroe#Continued_success_.281982-85.29


    1984 was arguably McEnroe's best year on the tennis tour, as he compiled an 82-3 record and won a career-high 13 singles tournaments, including Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. He also was on the U.S.' winning World Team Cup and runner-up Davis Cup teams. The only male who has come close to matching McEnroe's 1984 win-loss record since then was Roger Federer in 2005. Federer was 81-3 before losing his last match of the year to David Nalbandian.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2007
    #29
  30. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476

    I am not questioning Mac's credentials as a good player. One fabulous year (unless its a grandslam) doesnt make a great player. Great players are the players that overcome tough situations and obstacles.

    So McEnroe managed one french open final. Roger Federer is in FO finals twice. Federer won 10 grandslams and counting.
    Yet we somehow try to argue McEnroe is better than Federer.
     
    #30
  31. snapple

    snapple Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    319
    Have to agree with Diggler. Mac in 84 was unreal. Just as Fed's game today is inimitable, Mac's in 84 was unparralled, and experts were gushing over him just as they do Fed today. To see him utterly dismantle 3 times French Open winner, Ivan Lendl, on clay for two and a half sets was sick. Here he was effectively serve and volleying on a genuinely slow court (as opposed to today's clay) against the premier baseliner of the day. To use that match as an arguement against his greatness is ridiculous.
     
    #31
  32. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476

    Not really. Definitely not ridiculous. All said and done, what mcEnroe did in his career is more or less matched or surpassed by many players.

    Please read the intent of the thread.. It compares Federer to McEnroe. I am showing enough to prove that they dont belong in same league.
     
    #32
  33. diggler

    diggler Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,174
    Location:
    Sydney
    I think you missed my earlier post. Federer today would flog McEnroe on any surface. Not even close.

    Take Federer back to 1984 with frames of the era and it would be interesting. I'm not saying Mac would definately win, but he'd have a good chance.
     
    #33
  34. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916


    Now you're just being ignorant. Mac in 84 never faced players who could hit groundstrokes at 100 mph on a consistent basis. He never faced players who could serve 140 mph. He never faced genetic freaks like Nadal. He never faced players who could hit with spins up to 4000 rpms. Pretty easy to Serve and Volley in a time where equipment ALLOWED you to do it. Now adays, it doesn't.
     
    #34
  35. snapple

    snapple Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    319
    You're confusing accomplishments with greatness. As far as level of play between the lines, I believe that at Mac's best in 84, he possessed the talent and style to beat the mighty Fed, especially if the match was held in his era.

    By the way, I recently saw Mac play seniors in Boston, and I truly believe that he could still more than hold his own over a two set macth with all but a handful of players. Would never have thought this before seeing him last month. He serves harder today than 20 years ago, his groundies are also more powerful, and he still has remarkable touch. He beat Korda, crushed Courrier and was competitive with Sampras losing 3 and 4.
     
    #35
  36. MrSiki99

    MrSiki99 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    I think before you guys make comments you should buy Hooked on Phonics, and then make an attempt to spell properly.
     
    #36
  37. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Why? . do you plan on buying that book to all of the forum members?
     
    #37
  38. Too Poor for Grass

    Too Poor for Grass New User

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    93
    Well, wait a minute. Don't go overboard. Borg was Nadal X 2 and, quite possibly, the fittest tennis player to ever set foot on a court, be it in 2007, 1977, or 1927.
     
    #38
  39. herosol

    herosol Professional

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,184
    i agree. but alot of you guys are saying that federer would destroy him because today's game is different. if mcenroe was in his prime playing the game that was played today, he would no doubt be a threat in the top 10's.
     
    #39
  40. MrSiki99

    MrSiki99 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Point proven.
     
    #40
  41. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,476
    Precisely. This is the problem with people who think they are smarter than others and often fail to follow their own advise.
     
    #41
  42. djsiva

    djsiva Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Obviously Federer would be beat McEnroe now

    That's why he plays the senior's circuit.

    I guarantee he would beat Venus, Serena, Henin NOW at his age, easily.

    What I was saying is that McEnroe before his comeback would have beaten Federer very convincingly. He would made Federer and Nadal look stupid.

    Watch the tapes. What Mcenroe did was beautiful. As for beating Chang, yeah chang was 16, but still Chang actually won the French the next year and McEnroe was far passed his best. Plus McEnroe beat him on clay.
     
    #42
  43. Jet Rink

    Jet Rink Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    677
    And a Faiyne good-natured ribbing! Well done (Campioni del' Europa, amico!)

    Jet
     
    #43
  44. Fedace

    Fedace Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    23,292
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Have you been smoking some hash ??:confused:
     
    #44
  45. 35ft6

    35ft6 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    6,557
    Stop living in the past, people.
     
    #45
  46. michael_1265

    michael_1265 Professional

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    960
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    I think many of us can appreciate Mac's genius (and his self-destructive tendencies, especially late in his career), but any comparison is filled with way too many "ifs". Remember that his career straddled the revolution in racquet materials, and it was definitely to Mac's detriment. Also, Mac was way behind in the fitness department, even to many players of his day. On a fast court in his prime with both players in peak form AND ALL OTHER FACTORS EQUAL (an impossibility), I'll still take Mac to anyone. His shotmaking is second to none, and his competitive fire can't be denied.

    Given current levels of fitness and equipment technology, Mac just wouldn't hold up against a top-10 player. Note I didn't say anything about current playing styles, which I don't believe are necessarily superior.
     
    #46
  47. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    McEnroe won the next two grand slams, including a win over Lendl at the US Open. I didn't say that McEnroe didn't lose to Lendl at all when at his peak, but he was a much better player and almost defeated Ivan on clay - Mac's worst surface.
     
    #47
  48. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Troll post.

    Many great players have not won a French Open. And few claim that Mac was the greatest ever, even though his peak was incredible. But there is more to being the greatest than that.
     
    #48
  49. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Mac was insane in '84. His play at Wimbledon that year and the one before was the best grass court tennis I've ever seen.
     
    #49
  50. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Of course, McEnroe is a great player. Seven grand slam titles is enough to earn him that distinction.

    I don't think he'll go down as better than Federer. Few people do.
     
    #50

Share This Page