Tougher Competition: 2004-2006 or 2007-2009 - Page 2

lambielspins · 11-21-2009, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsonga#1fan

I think they are better lower-half top ten players than those of the prior time mentioned, yes I do. I also think Hewitt and Nalbandian benefitted greatly by coming along at a time when Sampras and agassi were beginning to decline. They (Hew/Nal) didn't last long at the top and as I stated quickly were not serious contenders anymore. Even Roddick jumped ahead of them.

Hewitt was still a legit top 3 player in 2004 and 2005. He fell off due to injuries and burnout. A gridner like him is rarely at their best past their mid 20s and he wasnt either. It isnt due to an improved field. Hewitt at his best would be better than a guy like Davydenko who has regularly been top 5 even as the players you mentioned emerged.

Nalbandian is overrated on TW but he has still beaten all of the best players many times over. He has almost a 50-50 winning ratio vs Federer, he leads Nadal 2-1 with all 3 matches being since 2007, he has beaten Djokovic and Murray in recent times. He just doesnt have the consistency needed to win a slam.

MuseFan · 11-21-2009, 06:42 PM

No doubt 2007-2009 is toughest era ever in tennis. AKA "Hard ****" era.

Tsonga#1fan · 11-21-2009, 07:36 PM

I just don't think Hewitt and Nalbandian are as good, or ever were, as many others seem to. Nalbandian only made one slam final and he probably wouldn't have even made it had Sampras not been upset in the second round of that Wimbledon in '02. Hewitt beat Nalbandian in that final. That was Hewitt's second and final grand slam championship, his first being the '01 USO where he beat a clearly used up wore out Sampras in the final. Two more slam runner-up's for Hewitt, one each in '04 and '05. That is it! Since then after a couple of semis and quarters it has been nothing but a James Blake-ish career since, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rounds. In their defense, Federer won his first slam Wimbledon '03 the year after Hewitt's so they never stood a chance with Federer, Roddick and others emerging as the new guard. They were just lucky to come along when they did.

lawrence · 11-21-2009, 07:59 PM

I think it may actually have been 2004-2006. Fed was just in god-mode so the others had no hope. Now he's lost a step but he's still making it to finals. See cinci, how he annihilated Djoko and Murray one after the other.

Ledigs · 11-21-2009, 08:08 PM

I just don't believe one person could be that dominant in world class tennis. I think that the quality dropped off a bit between 2004-2006. I mean a 35 year old Agassi making it to the US Open finals? COme on.

President of Serve/Volley · 11-21-2009, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ledigs

I just don't believe one person could be that dominant in world class tennis. I think that the quality dropped off a bit between 2004-2006. I mean a 35 year old Agassi making it to the US Open finals? COme on.

He's Andre Agassi, and only he can do that. Nothing wrong with that...

Breaker · 11-21-2009, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsonga#1fan

I just don't think Hewitt and Nalbandian are as good, or ever were, as many others seem to. Nalbandian only made one slam final and he probably wouldn't have even made it had Sampras not been upset in the second round of that Wimbledon in '02. Hewitt beat Nalbandian in that final. That was Hewitt's second and final grand slam championship, his first being the '01 USO where he beat a clearly used up wore out Sampras in the final. Two more slam runner-up's for Hewitt, one each in '04 and '05. That is it! Since then after a couple of semis and quarters it has been nothing but a James Blake-ish career since, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rounds. In their defense, Federer won his first slam Wimbledon '03 the year after Hewitt's so they never stood a chance with Federer, Roddick and others emerging as the new guard. They were just lucky to come along when they did.

'

Explain how...

one slam final Murray -- who was beaten senseless in his only slam final by Federer which you seem to fault Hewitt for,

one slam Djokovic who beat Fed once in a slam in a weakened state then has been beaten by "weak era" Haas, Safin, Roddick, Kohlschreiber, and owned by Federer twice as well in slams since that Aussie Open,

one slam final (or even semifinal) Tsonga who lost to that same Djokovic,

Soderling who has had 5 good months in his entire career so far,

and Verdasco who had one good tournament

--

Are in any way better to prime Hewitt or Nalbandian (Djokovic barely edges Nalby just because of the slam but he hasn't been any better otherwise).

The only one who has a case in the '07-'09 era is Nadal and even then until 2008 he wasn't a serious threat outside of clay.

GustafsonFanatic · 11-22-2009, 01:02 AM

^

You forgot to mention Del Potro, for some reason...

tacou · 11-22-2009, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaconda

HAHAHA, that's funny. Seeing as Tsonga is a mindless ball basher with no tactics and Murray hasn't won a slam.......Djokovic gets owned by the players who were great 5 years ago and JMDP hasn't won a masters event yet.
\

del potro won a grand slam? who cares about a masters. tsonga vs nadal 08 austaralian=senseless ball bashing...no.

Tsonga#1fan · 11-22-2009, 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breaker

'

Explain how...

one slam final Murray -- who was beaten senseless in his only slam final by Federer which you seem to fault Hewitt for,

one slam Djokovic who beat Fed once in a slam in a weakened state then has been beaten by "weak era" Haas, Safin, Roddick, Kohlschreiber, and owned by Federer twice as well in slams since that Aussie Open,

one slam final (or even semifinal) Tsonga who lost to that same Djokovic,

Soderling who has had 5 good months in his entire career so far,

and Verdasco who had one good tournament

--

Are in any way better to prime Hewitt or Nalbandian (Djokovic barely edges Nalby just because of the slam but he hasn't been any better otherwise).

The only one who has a case in the '07-'09 era is Nadal and even then until 2008 he wasn't a serious threat outside of clay.

Djoker, del Potro, Nadal, Murray, Tsonga and Roddick still have time and game left to compete and wim slams, yes against Federer......Hewitt and Nalbandian never stood a chance against Federer during their so called "prime", or was that more accurately "their 15 minuites of fame"? Leyton Hewitt will be remembered more for being a loud-mouth jack ass than great tennis player. Hewitt's two grand slam wins came against a "weakened and aging" Sampras and "the all time great" Nalbandian!

Anaconda · 11-22-2009, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tacou

del potro won a grand slam? who cares about a masters. tsonga vs nadal 08 austaralian=senseless ball bashing...no.

One match proves nothing, he hasn't played like that since. Mindless ball bashing - i think so.

Breaker · 11-22-2009, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsonga#1fan

Djoker, del Potro, Nadal, Murray, Tsonga and Roddick still have time and game left to compete and wim slams, yes against Federer......Hewitt and Nalbandian never stood a chance against Federer during their so called "prime", or was that more accurately "their 15 minuites of fame"? Leyton Hewitt will be remembered more for being a loud-mouth jack ass than great tennis player. Hewitt's two grand slam wins came against a "weakened and aging" Sampras and "the all time great" Nalbandian!

Federer is not in his prime any more -- yet is still winning slams against this amazingly 'strong' field.

LOL at Tsonga continually being used as an example. He isn't even near Nalbandian's level in terms of a career yet let alone Hewitt. His game is also more incomplete than Nalby's or Hewitt's which may keep him at that same level his entire career.

Djokovic was only a threat to beat Federer once in a slam when it was clear Federer was at less than his best which to be fair he converted on -- then faced career two slam-quarter Tsonga who was clearly overmatched. Since then he hasn't been a threat to win a slam.

Murray's slam results haven't even matched Nalbandian's yet and in his one chance to beat Federer in a slam he was destroyed. Otherwise he is beaten by players who he is heavily favoured to beat.

Del Potro has only just reached his prime and did have a good slam recently, beating a pretty good Federer in the final. However he also lost to Hewitt in the slam previous. He's had only 3 months out of the '07-'09 period where he can even be used as competition during this era.

Roddick was basically the same -- if not better, in '04-'06 than '07-'09. He's 2-19 against Federer and was overmatched by Hewitt in '04-'05, so I don't see how he can be used as a counterargument.

Michael Bluth · 11-22-2009, 09:32 AM

Agreed that if Fed were at 2005-06 level he'd be owning this field too. Calendar grand slam would be a cakewalk.

View Poll Results: When?
2004-2006	7	15.56%
2007-2009	27	60.00%
Same	11	24.44%
Voters: 45. You may not vote on this poll

11-21-2009, 07:59 PM	#24
lawrence Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,637	I think it may actually have been 2004-2006. Fed was just in god-mode so the others had no hope. Now he's lost a step but he's still making it to finals. See cinci, how he annihilated Djoko and Murray one after the other. __________________ "I currently rank Federer as the 8th greatest male player of all time." -grafselesfan

11-21-2009, 08:08 PM	#25
Ledigs Hall Of Fame Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: NY Posts: 1,508	I just don't believe one person could be that dominant in world class tennis. I think that the quality dropped off a bit between 2004-2006. I mean a 35 year old Agassi making it to the US Open finals? COme on. __________________ Love the top 3 right now. Couldn't ask for better.

11-22-2009, 01:02 AM	#28
GustafsonFanatic Banned Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 582	^ You forgot to mention Del Potro, for some reason... Last edited by GustafsonFanatic : 11-22-2009 at 01:08 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode