Nalbandian 2007 Will this kind of tennis ever exist again?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Dgpsx7, Jul 16, 2013.

  1. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,024
    FH. Absolutely not. It's not Nalbandian 'obviously'! Safin's FH has a lot more power and is more consistent; It only became a poor shot after the injury he sustained in 2005 and he couldn't hit with as much power.


    Safin was not dire at the net. He just played a baseline orientated game. Safin's anticipation exceeds Nalbandian's at the net, and has made some of the most outrageous volley's I've ever seen. You clearly haven't watched Safin if you believe he was poor at the net. Remember we are talking pre 2005 here before he became useless.




    And no. I am not repeating my categories; Net game and volleys are two seperate things (much like foot speed and footwork and Improv & touch, serve and service game). Net game is the package - approach/technique & execution. Not known for speed? Safin was one of the fastest guys around, even though he was big.








    Indoor is not a surface; It's merely a condition.
     
    #51
  2. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Nalbandian must be the most overrated player of Federer's generation. He matched up well against Federer and was good indoors. Like Federer he was also very good on every surface with no weakness, but unlike Federer he was never one of the best on any particular surface.

    On Grass-Hewitt, Roddick and Federer were better.
    On clay-Federer, Coria, Ferrero and young Nadal were better.
    On hardcourts-Federer, Hewitt, Roddick and Safin were better.
    Indoors is where he shone, but even then Federer and Safin were better.

    He was a great player to watch and a fantastic shot maker when on, but people are going way over the top.
     
    #52
  3. Federer20042006

    Federer20042006 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,173
    The ankle was fine, it was his fitness that let him down. He hadn't been training for very long after the sprain.

    The brace slowed him down a little, but the ankle certainly never "gave out." It's a huge insult to Nalbandian to pretend Federer was that severely hobbled and still served for the match in a Best of 5.

    That said, Nalbandian was nowhere near the intimidating force Safin was. Safin had much bigger weapons.
     
    #53
  4. Emiliano55

    Emiliano55 Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,117
    Why this stupid Safin vs Nalbandian thing ? Both players belong to a REALLY small group in tennis history in regards of talent and gifted players.

    Despite Nalbandian lazyness and fat issues, both players suffered the same issues: Consistency and mental problems.
    Safin took his opportunities, that's why he won 2 slams. Nalbandian just couldn't. That's the key difference between these 2 monsters.


    And btw, Safin BH was incredible, but I can't believe you guys are putting it ahead of Nalbys. David's BH is one of the best BHs in tennis history. And Safin FH was much better than Nalby's.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2013
    #54
  5. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,024
    Federer was hindered in that match. I don't think people realise that Federer's footwork was his most important asset in his game in the years he was at his best. His movement was the main reason his forehand was so good and it was the sole reason he declined mid 2007; There is a correlation in his level of play and footwork. His forehand became a shank tool when his movement rusted up. So please, whether it's a slight tweek, it's still a big problem.
     
    #55
  6. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,680
    Location:
    In The City
    2005 AO SF

    Federer: 72 winners and 59 Unforced errors
    Safin: 65 winners and 60 Unforced errors

    2005 TMC final

    Federer: 63 winners and 72 unforced errors
    Nalbandian: 66 winners and 57 unforced errors.

    The TMC final had even more errors and had 2 sets worth of trash tennis where Federer was completely offline.
     
    #56
  7. Russeljones

    Russeljones G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    12,916
    My view on the matter is that I think we should be careful when looking at UEs and not give their numbers the same weight in matches between completely different type of tennis players. If someone like Federer or Safin makes them, there is a certain degree of probability (based on their respective risk/winners appetite) that these could have been winners. When someone like Nalbandian makes them, it's less certain that these shots could have been winners. This is why comparisons like this will become harder and harder as people's memory of the matches and players themselves diminishes with time.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2013
    #57
  8. monfed

    monfed Guest

    If Nalbandian had won USO 03, his career would've taken off.

    It would've been amazing for tennis if Federer Nalbandian was the main rivalry off clay and Coria Nadal was on clay(though I'd prefer Federer vs Nalbandian on all surfaces but just to be "fair")
     
    #58
  9. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Agree bout the Nalbandian part, but please note that Fed had a MP against Safin and was 5-2 up in the 4th set breaker so one would have to say he blew it, this gets usually overlooked for some reason. Also Fed did win the first set and was 2-1 up in sets at the beginning of the fourth and given that he had smacked Safin at AO 04, he really should've wrapped it up in 4 using the mental advantage he'd gained from AO 04.
    Alas! it wasn't to be. :(
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 20, 2013
    #59
  10. ASH1485

    ASH1485 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    487
    i dont see any talents coming like Nalbandian or Fed, especially when all the kids now are brought up to play like Nadal and Djoko.
     
    #60
  11. Magnus

    Magnus Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,172
    He didn't beat Fed easily at all though, where he squashed Nadal. Just sayin'.
     
    #61
  12. Magnus

    Magnus Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,172
    Nalby's BH was very much on par with Safin's, perhaps even better.
     
    #62
  13. Hood_Man

    Hood_Man Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    8,324
    Location:
    Wales
    #63
  14. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,024
    You do realise Safin was A) Playing his first tournament in a long time (nearly a year) and B) Had to go four sets at least in every match? The Roddick and Agassi 5 setters did him in. It's my opinion that Safin, regardless of lack of preparation from all that time out, had not been a zombie in the final, would have taken that tournament. Remember Federer wasn't 'the guy' to beat at that event; Roddick was still the #1 and Safin was able to take care of him even with an injury in the first set. Certainly would have won AO 2004 if he wasn't crippled in 2003; Ranking doesn't drop - better seed - = avoids that draw, is a lot more match tough etc etc. If anything, I think it gave Safin more belief. 7-6 6-4 6-2 against Federer isn't completely worthless especially if it's a final where you have already proven your worth AND you've got nothing left to give.
     
    #64
  15. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Federer was 'the guy' to beat clearly before the tournament. Everyone thought Federer would win especially after his Masters Cup victory. During the tournament he was being hailed as potentially greatest player of all time.Safin has never been able to take care of Roddick easily.
     
    #65
  16. jelle v

    jelle v Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,993
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    The angles that Nalbandian can play with his incredible backhand are just insane, no one else on the tour can play like that.. Big fan of Nalbandian's tennis :cool:
     
    #66
  17. Dgpsx7

    Dgpsx7 Professional

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,164
    Thanks, I just edited it and added them.
     
    #67
  18. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916

    His ankle was gone by the end of that match, Federer was playing basically no movement tennis in the 5th set by just gunning everything including volleys, something he never does. He was employing shots like swinging volleys, drop shots, and aggressively attacking off the first ball, things he never did in his peak, because he felt it was beneath him to do so. Either way, Federer was severely hampered that match, and thinking Nalbandian won that on his own skill is hilarious.
     
    #68
  19. Defcon

    Defcon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,708
    His sure was a pleasure to watch unlike total bores like Nadal, Muzza and Djoker. I rate Nalby higher in pure talent than Djoker and Muzza and miles ahead of Rafa.
     
    #69
  20. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Sorry Anaconda, I didn't mean to be disingenuous to Safin about his AO 04 loss to Fed and it may have come from fatigue as you said. Let me say that I like Safin and I thought he was a great character to have around on tour.

    But Fed was the top seed for AO 05 and also the favourite plus Fed was playing at an astonishingly high level and the best I've seen him move(besides the foot blisters) on a court, hadn't dropped a set till he met Safin and had won the first set in their semi and even after dropping the second, he took the third which is usually a decisive set in a tightly contested match. In the 4th Fed was up 5-2 in the breaker and MP on his own serve and should've won from that position.
    Credit to Marat for fighting back and somehow taking it to a 5th. I agree that in the 5th, Fed was kinda outplayed even though the scoreline shows 9-7. Would you say this is a fair assessment?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 21, 2013
    #70
  21. BeHappy

    BeHappy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,789
    I don't see how anyone can argue that Federer was any less injured in his Safin SF at the AO than in his Nalbandian final at the YEC. In both cases he seemed to be basically unaffected to me, but maybe we're all seeing what our biases are pointing us toward and the truth lies somewhere in between.

    My only point was that Nalbandian was capable of playing some of the absolute best tennis ever, and dominating Fedal and Murrovic, but that he didn't deliver on that promise because he would get fat at Christmas every year and then spend the rest of the year losing weight, then go back to square 1.
     
    #71
  22. Federer20042006

    Federer20042006 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,173
    :confused:

    Are you sure you watched Federer during his peak? What they heck do you think he was, a pure baseline ball basher?

    Nalbandian had way more trouble with Federer in that match than he had against him in either 2007 Madrid or Paris indoors, when Federer's ankle was 100%. Federer was maybe a half step slower and he was clearly fatigued in the 4th set, which he tanked at the end, before finding his second wind in the 5th after going down 4-0, but it wasn't the ankle that was the problem, it was his conditioning.
     
    #72
  23. 4sound

    4sound Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    530
    Location:
    Match Point
    Gotta give Nalbandian his props!

    Nalbandian strike was very clean. His balance after strike is better than most. He executed game plans like a surgeon & moved pretty good for a big guy because of his early ball tracking off the opponents strike.

    He beat both Nadal & Fed when they were winning most of the Slams. They took "Big Dave" very seriously when they faced him.

    As far as beating Djokovic, that was earlier. Djokovic is much better now. It would be tough for him to handle the relentless Djokovic game these days (even at his best).

    Many have the potential but few have the mental or physical consistency to maintain that type of level year after year.
    Its hard enough to stay in the top 10 through multiple years.
     
    #73
  24. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Federer's problem with Safin in 2005 was fitness. His legs were gone in the fourth. This probably led to other foot problems, but he occurred these during the match.

    Nothing like the Nalbandian match, where Federer's fitness was very, very low and his ankle had started to give out on him.

    Again Nalbandian was never the best at any one service. Apart from indoors he could not beat Federer and even then Safin was better than him. Apart from the Australian Open 2006 and 2003 US Open he was never that close to winning a slam, because others were better. Having a pretty game does not make you a better player.
     
    #74
  25. BeHappy

    BeHappy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,789
    But as with Safin and Rios, when he was "on" he was unstoppable. The fact he failed in all those areas you mention is just because he was unfit and valued cake, fishing and rally car racing over success.

    Fed had blisters against Safin, an ankle injury against Nalbandian, to me he seemed to be moving fine in each match. I'm not picking on your words like Mustard but he came pretty close to winning a slam in Wimbledon 2002 as well.
     
    #75
  26. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,024
    No. Roddick was #1. He was the best player of 2003 and was the best player going into that tournament. Who was everyone? It's easy to say this kind of crap looking back on everything, but who the hell was rating Federer as a potential GOAT candidate at the AO 2004; His draw was very weak - his best opponent was a guy who was out for a year and had 0% energy.






    Monfed: Agree. We missed so many epics between those guys. That fifth set, although their was choking from both guys, was very high quality, that tie break was just sick, that tournament was Safin's highest display of mental strength I've seen; His final, whilst might not have been his best tennis, was just as impressive - Horror first set, playing Hewitt in his back yard, down a break in the third. I just think his play in 2004 was just as good, maybe better; He just had more matches going into 2005 and a lot more confidence after a strong ending in 2004.










    As for the Nalbandian debate regarding posters in this thread. Federer was injured and clearly not at his best. I understand their is a 15 minute reel of that match on youtube which makes it look like Nalbandian went to hell and back beating an on fire Federer but it's not what happened. Federer had many moments of madness in that match, and Nalbandian was doing his utmost best to give the match to Federer; Wasn't Nalbandian like 5-0 up in the final set? So Nalbandian can play at a higher level than Safin, yet A) Not win slams B) Nearly choke matches from pretty much 100% winning positions against an injured Federer and C) Fail to win slams?




    Federer is fresher at the AO than he is at MC. Nalbandian was very fresh because he doesn't go as deep at the other events. Put him against Federer at AO 2005 (didn't they meet at that event?) and he loses in straights. Bye!
     
    #76
  27. ctoth666

    ctoth666 Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    827
    Location:
    Woodstock, CT
    This is why I tend to agree that Federer played in "weaker" era: it's not that there weren't talented players that could've challenged him, but rather that those players didn't really rise to the occasion. Nalbandian is a great example of a player who should've/could've been Federer's rival from 2004-2007. He was that good.
     
    #77
  28. wy2sl0

    wy2sl0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,568
    People talk a lot of crap but soon forget....

    Roddick prime on indoor/outdoor hardcourt I would pick over Nadal
    Roddick had winning h2h against Djoker, would choose him in fast hard/grass; not slow or clay obviously

    This entire forum seems to forget that despite the absolute ownage that Federer had over Roddick, he was a damn good player - probably a 2-4 slam winner in this era right now if he was in his prime. But that is just my opinion. Players of different generations adapted to their surroundings and conditions to thrive. Federer is virtually the ONLY successful player to EVER do this in two respective eras. Connors and Agassi get a shout out as well, but not on Fed's level.
     
    #78
  29. droliver

    droliver Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    703
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL U.S.A.
    I really miss Nalbandian as he really played an interesting style. He was very sound technically and frustrating to play against. His A-game was as good as anyone on tour for most of the last decade.
     
    #79
  30. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,024
    When Roddick played aggressive, he was able to handle Nadal at Dubai (a very fast court) and Miami (very slow HC). I'd favour Roddick playing his 03/04 game over Nadal in terms of matchup the majority of the time; Of course people will screw over this comment as the general consensus is that the head to head and matchup problems somehow indicate who the better player is. Grass I think the matchup would be a tossup. They wouldn't play on clay - Roddick is just too bad. Roddick with literally no game was still able to take out Nadal in his supposedly best two years (08 & 10) and Murray/Djokovic in the slams around that time. He would have won more slams if he didn't ditch his forehand and get fat, regardless of Federer imo.
     
    #80
  31. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Not true at all. Even when Safin was 'on', he was not guaranteed to beat Roddick on his favourite surface. As for Rios he was great to watch, but never had the heights of Sampras. Nalbandian 'on' form apart from indoors was never likely to beat the best and that is why he did not win slams.
    Fed moved great in the match against Safin and was a high quality match through out. Against Nalbandian he was clearly struggling. In fact despite his double bagel, he struggled all the tournament and was not at his best.

    At Wimbledon 2002 he was thrashed by Hewitt. At the 2005 Australian Open he lost to Hewitt on rebound ace, one of Hewitt's weaker surface.

    On form or not, there were guys, who were plain better than Nalbandian at every slam.
     
    #81

Share This Page