mike danny
Bionic Poster
Same thing with Kyrgios. He is turning 23 in 2 weeks and he still hasn't done anything since his 2014 breakthrough.
If he was going to do something, he’d have done it by now. 23 is not that young anymore.
Most overrated and underrated player?
- Thread starter Deleted member 756486
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fedr goat overrated players underrated
If he was going to do something, he’d have done it by now. 23 is not that young anymore.
lulo
Semi-Pro
Dimitrov can't be considered overated. To be considered overated people must think you're actually good
heninfan99
Talk Tennis Guru
LOL
Terenigma
G.O.A.T.
According to Gilles Simon, Nishikori has the best backhand in the business. But it's not even a weapon as far as you're concerned.
This the same Giles Simon that has played Nishikori a grand total of ZERO times on the ATP tour? Yeah, he's the expert i should listen to, it must be a killer backhand on the training courts but lemme know when he's using it on the actual tour, where it matters.
Freddy Cat
Professional
Cheat example? Lol... I literally gave you a player who has a better serve than Federer, and YOU are the one cherry-picking. If it's a better serve, it's a better serve -- that's that.
Unfortunately, difficult to argue the Del Potro vs Federer stats, when both of us can only come up with our own, personal observations. There's obviously no stats to support either -- and it is probably not possible to statistically evaluate, or would be extremely rigorous.
Makes me question if you've ever actually seen Ivo play before -- he ONLY serves and volleys. Lol, I'd challenge you to find another player who could come behind on EVERY point -- even behind Ivo's serve -- and win 90% of the points -- but I'm the one talking out of my ass by making up imaginary stats. Being difficult to lob is extremely relevant, as it's going to completely change the way your opponent tries to get by you -- and it makes you a lot more dangerous at the net. If they're not in a position for a passing shot, the easiest thing to do is lob, in which case Ivo is obviously a lot more dangerous at the net. Obviously being long/tall is going to influence the effectiveness of your net game...
Two random samples... choose any single rally you want to compare, frame by frame. Ivo is significantly quicker -- and his weight transfer forward is way better. Do it yourself so that you can't accuse me of cherry-picking.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Terenigma
G.O.A.T.
Yeah i haven't played him but why is Giles Simon's opinion more valid than my own? He plays tennis, so do i. He's a famous player and i am not but that doesn't mean i am unqualified to have an opinion on a tennis player or a shot. I have eyes, i can see how Nishikori plays and i am taking issue with this claim he has a top tier backhand. Where is it? Does he only produce it when he's not playing on TV?
When people talk about backhands, they talk about Djokovic or Murray or players like Wawrinka and Gasquet and the reason they talk about these players is because they are regularly producing incredible backhand shots. I see them, they are huge and win points out of nowhere. I do not see that with Nishikori, it's just a normal shot played well. I've actually watched a couple of videos of his backhands now just to try and be humble and maybe accept he has a decent hand and even on the videos, the majority of the times he hit them, he's in total control of the point.
His BH is overrated, his talent is overrated. Nishikori is overrated.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Are you a comedian? Is this your latest material? I'll admit, it's hilarious.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Delpo's running forehand is not better than peak Fed's a couple of booming slap shots aside(and Federer has hit those too, not that it's really relevant because that's highlight video material and very rarely applicable in a match setting). There have been a few guys better on the dead run(Sampras, Nadal, maybe Lendl), but no one matches Federer's few steps then FH, and that shot is way more commonly applicable than a FH on the dead run.
His whole post was total nonsense as usual when it comes to Fed (unfortunately evaluating tennis is not as easy as watching highlight videos), you have a lot of patience replying to all of it!
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Random samples? LOL those are highlight videos, and even then most of Karlovic's first volleys in that video are quite mediocre. I'd say it takes away from your credibility, but I think you lost it many times over when you said Karlovic is "significantly quicker" than Federer at any part of the game. LMAO. I know it's fun to be a contrarian but this is just comedy man.
Karlovic's unreturned serve rate is probably around 50% if not higher, and counting the number of easy replies pushes that number even higher. His first serve points won is just over 80%, which shows you how relatively few points he wins with the first serve being neutrally returned, given that it's fair that around 60-70% of his serves are unreturned or weakly returned, and even higher on the first serve. If he was even a Federer level serve volleyer he'd probably win closer to 90% of his first serve points.
Last edited:
Freddy Cat
Professional
I thought it'd be easier to compare two videos, rather than to deny what is blatantly obvious. That's too common sense, apparently.
Typical radical fed fan that can't handle the facts. If you had even the slightest clue what was being discussed, you wouldn't have been looking at the highlights -- you'd have been looking at how they move towards the net (which were NOT the highlights). How they move towards the net is going to be recurring and comparable -- regardless of the quality of volley they execute afterwards. There are no confounding variables in their net approach (to a certain point). Remedial comprehension is in order here. Please learn to read before you become so arrogant in your wrongness.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Wait so you're saying 6'10" Ivo Karlovic, one of the worst moving players in ATP history, is quicker moving forward than one of the quickest and most agile players in history because your subjective eye test, which no one else will agree with, says so? Federer is not particularly great closing the net compared to the Edberg/Sampras' of the world but Karlovic is just a laughable comparison. I'm not making any more serious replies to you, this has to be a joke. Start a thread if you want a more general opinion.
Freddy Cat
Professional
Lol. There's nothing subjective about it when I go 15 frames in on the Federer video, and 15 frames in on the Karlovic video. That's what someone with common sense would do -- but that'd entail you seeing something you don't want to see. I'm pretty sure a ~230-250 lbs man is going to have better weight transfer/momentum to carry him forward than someone who's 180 lbs. This isn't actually based on opinion -- if you're objective (which you clearly have a difficult time being) you can make a fair, qualitative estimate based on those videos. I'm sorry that you can't recruit a Federer bandwagon to warp a video, clear-as-day, to benefit your argument.
Meles
Bionic Poster
Meles
Bionic Poster
Most here would rate Becker and Edberg much higher with less slams.
Meles
Bionic Poster
NatF
Bionic Poster
Most overrated: Federer
Most underrated: Zverev
Federer: Most slam titles in history
Zverev: Yet to beat a top 50 player at a slam
Seems about right
70後
Hall of Fame
Over and under according to ttw? Overrated on tt imo is Edberg. For instance, ttw's collective thought actually places his peak over Borg at Wimbledon. But Borg at Wimbledon is in fact Mac + Connors, he is an absolute monster who can only be compared with Fed/Sampras.
Underrated on ttw is Wilander whose accomplishments are determinedly ignored. It is as if his career almost didn't exist as far as ttw is concerned. It can't all be due to Wilander the commentator and Wimbledon-is-fundamental fundamentalism.
In the real world both are rated just about right.
Underrated on ttw is Wilander whose accomplishments are determinedly ignored. It is as if his career almost didn't exist as far as ttw is concerned. It can't all be due to Wilander the commentator and Wimbledon-is-fundamental fundamentalism.
In the real world both are rated just about right.
TheFifthSet
Legend
Federer's forehand is better than Delpo's, his serve is top 10 today, his volleys (particularly stretch volleys and any volley/half-volley on the shoe tops) are better than Ivo's and his backhand is better than Gasquet's.
That is all.
Shank Volley
Hall of Fame
I fixed it for you.
TheFifthSet
Legend
Do you only take into account first serves? Because Dimitrov's second serve isn't close to Federer's. His first serve is pacier, but not as accurate or as good, ace rates are higher for Federer (20-25% higher against the top 5-10) and based on the matches I've seen charted on Tennis Abstract, Fed has the higher unreturned serve %. So what are you basing this on?
Cilic's serve when he's zoned in is better than Fed's, but he lands the first serve in 5-8% less on average. That's a pretty insurmountable advantage. Also, keep in mind that Federer routinely plays the top guys and the serving stats do not reflect this. Look at their career ace rates: Cilic leads 11.3-10.0, a margin of 1.3%. What happens when you narrow it down to matches against the top 50? Marin's edge all but vanishes: its 10.0-9.7. Top 10? 9.9-9.6. Top 5? 9.2-9.0.
With Dimi the drop-off is just as bad, btw.
Del Potro's forehand is flatter, harder, way better on the run, and more consistent than Federer's ever has been.
Federer's forehand has more variety, is better I/O, equal cross-court and better down the line.
Delpo's forehand is more consistent? First I'm hearing of this. It's up there with any forehand at its best, but Federer has the more consistent forehand.
Ivo's a way better volleyer than Federer is. That, atop a longer wingspan and more difficult to lob. Ivo's skill at the net is comparable to Federer -- both defensively and offensively... except Ivo is way harder to pass. Also, Ivo is way quicker up to the net than Federer is -- I recommend you watch some S&V videos of them both, and compare it frame-by-frame, Karlovic is quite a bit quicker, better transition from the serve, and is just all-round better at his net approach.
His wingspan/difficulty passing/lobbing is counterbalanced by his relative struggles on the low volley. He's harder to pass, in absolute terms, because his serve is a more difficult shot to pass on and elicits weaker replies.
Now, don't get me wrong, Ivo is a very capable volleyer but the primary reason he approaches the net on that howitzer of a serve so often is because the alternative is to trade groundstrokes against an opponent that is guaranteed to have a better baseline game.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
anyone who thinks dimitrov has a better serve than federer is utterly, totally, haplessly clueless about tennis.
same for someone who thinks delpo's FH is more consistent than federer's or that ivo is a better volleyer than federer is.
Last edited:
zagor
Bionic Poster
I was talking in a broader context, not individual match-ups (whether Sampras is better than Fed on grass or Borg vs Nadal on clay). It is my opinion that with the prevalent conditions today (especially since late 2000s) vast majority of ATGs would showcase comparable consistency across different surfaces that they just couldn't do in previous eras (thinking about the Open Era mostly) because of the surface and playing style polarization.
Especially when it comes to Fed, Nadal and Novak the media is often trying to present them as just being the 3 best players in the history (with Murray getting an honorary ATG status despite trailing in achievements to guys like Becker, Edberg and Wilander), I don't really buy that, they're ignoring the changes to the game that lead to such miraculous surface versatility, consistency and in Fedal cases longevity.
abmk
Bionic Poster
"Nadal’s BHP is +1.7 per 100 backhands, a few ticks below those of Murray and Djokovic, whose BHPs are +2.6 and +2.5, respectively. Among the game’s current elite, Kei Nishikorisports the best BHP, at +3.6, while Andre Agassi‘s was a whopping +5.0. "
http://www.tennisabstract.com/blog/2017/01/30/the-federer-backhand-that-finally-beat-nadal/
---------
The player in question was Kei Nishikori, who plays Federer in a fourth-round night match Sunday at Rod Laver Arena.
“I’m a big fan of his game,” Federer said. “He’s got one of the best backhands out there. I love how he can crush it down the line or cross-court.
http://indianexpress.com/article/sp...i-nishikoris-game-says-roger-federer-4485204/
Nishikori is still committed to playing the Sydney and Australian Opens, but his return has been postponed to February. 'Well I think we're very thanfkul what he's brought to the game of tennis, he has a great respect for all the other players,' Federer said about Nishikori, against whom he as a 5-2 win-to-loss record.
'I think he's got one of the best backhands in the game if not the best one. We wish him a speedy recovery, we miss him on Tour.
http://www.**************.org/tenni...he-same-without-nishikori-and-other-players-/
yeah, sure those stats are crap, Roger freakin' federer doesn't have a clue about nishikori's BH and you are right !
metsman
G.O.A.T.
You forgot the grand daddy of them all, Ivo is "significantly quicker" moving to net than Federer.Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse on TTW "Nishikori has an average backhand"
@Meles has some serious competition in the hot take department. Thiem having the best second serve ever is downright tame compared to this.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Nah he was spot on with that one. Go frame by frame on those highlights videos and see for yourself Fed-stapo cretin.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
van_Loederen
Professional
most underrated on this forum is definitely Nadal, outside clay.
from what i've heard is blood testing still not very common in tennis.
the players who are actually caught doping might just be the tip of the iceberg, mate.
from what i've heard is blood testing still not very common in tennis.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
Federer won only 27% of his return games, yet he has the best groundstrokes, footwork, return ever...
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Nishikori just detroyed Berdych's second serves with his overrated "average" backhand. Imagine if his backhand was an actual weapon.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Nobody else had Karlovic's serve, but, for instance, Sampras won 87-90% 1st serve points at Wimbledon throughout 1992-99 (2000 was down due to poor early rounds). Since Wimbledon alone wouldn't provide enough matches for Karlovic, let's take the whole grass season and we'll see that his norm is 82-87%, with only 2009 standing at 89% - and that was Ivo's absolute grasscourt peak, when he managed a record holding streak playing 23 sets without getting broken before GOATerer put an end to that.
Anyway, tennisabstract's sample of 16 charted Karlovic matches has him at 412/641 serve-and-volley points won for 64.3% efficiency. Federer is 1351/1947 for 299 matches for 69.4% efficiency at S&V. The sample is naturally varied, no problem. So that's interesting, if Ivo has the much better serve AND the much better volley than Fedzie, how come there's such a discrepancy? Even with him serving-and-volleying six times as often, if he were significantly better in both facets as you insist, he should have had better stats, so since he does have a significantly better serve, his volley must be worse (ORLY?).
You were talking about volleys specifically, not net game in whole. Don't move the goalposts now.
Karlovic approaches the net closer, relyng on his giant wingspan to cover the angles. Federer stays a bit more back and has to make tougher volleys or half-volleys from the service line or so, which he still executes amazingly. Same efficiency, Federer 'compensates' for lesser wingspan with better volley quality. Yeah, he sure is a better volleyer. Again, that refers specifically to volleying skill, not horizontal/vertical reach. The ability to get to the ball and the ability to hit it well once you got to it are separate.
Last edited:
Mainad
Bionic Poster
I agree with you about the excessive media hype. That aside, players adapt to the conditions of their time. Again, we just don't know how any of them would have adapted to the conditions and playing surfaces of different eras. My belief is that the truly great players would have adapted to whomever or whatever they were faced with. IMO we can never say that Player Y would not have been great in Era B because of Playing Surface C. We just don't know and it is pointless to speculate (although you are entitled to your opinions on that of course).
captainbryce
Hall of Fame
Actually, 23 is still pretty young. Federer won his first slam at around Kyrgios age, then went on to win 19 more. Not saying that Kyrgios will accomplish this or anything. But 23 is still very young.
Pheasant
Legend
Most underrated: Ivan Lendl. This guy hardly ever gets mentioned. But he had 270 weeks at #1, made it to 19 slam finals(won 8), won 5 WTF(includes making a record 9 straight finals), and he made it to 8 consecutive USO finals. He also ended the year world #1 3 straight years and 4 out of a 5 year span. This guy at his peak was indestructible. And his competition was impossible. He got to see peak Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Agassi, and Sampras. He also played in an era of more diverse surfaces, ones that didn't suit his baseline game.
Most overrated: Federer. Federer is the most overrated male that belongs to the 20+ slam title club. He's also the most overrated male member of the 300+ club for weeks ranked #1. He's the most overrated member of the 11 for 16 club(11 slam titles out of 16 possible). And lastly, he's the most overrated male of the 15+ club for consecutive slam semis.
Most overrated: Federer. Federer is the most overrated male that belongs to the 20+ slam title club. He's also the most overrated male member of the 300+ club for weeks ranked #1. He's the most overrated member of the 11 for 16 club(11 slam titles out of 16 possible). And lastly, he's the most overrated male of the 15+ club for consecutive slam semis.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Federer by the time he reached Kyrgios's current age:
2 GS titles
1 YEC title
2 masters titles
No.1 in the world.
And that's only until April 2004, around the same time as now.
An astronomic difference.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Current overrated: Kyrios
Get sick of hearing what a special talent the guy is when he can't put together a decent season of play. he steps up here and there, but is utterly a mental cluster-f most the time. It's like the poor man's Monfils, but at least Monfils is generally likeable and a good ambassador of the sport.
Get sick of hearing what a special talent the guy is when he can't put together a decent season of play. he steps up here and there, but is utterly a mental cluster-f most the time. It's like the poor man's Monfils, but at least Monfils is generally likeable and a good ambassador of the sport.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
overrated: players people like
underrated: players people don't like
underrated: players people don't like
Freddy Cat
Professional
it’s not moving the goal posts. Wingspan is very much relevant for volleys — as it’s going to broaden the amounts he can execute. It’s kind of like saying I can’t say Ivo has a better serve, simply because his physical structure gives him more options. I’m not comparing their volley skills in proportion to their height, i’m comparing their volley skills — period. And Federer is at a disadvantage in that comparison.
As for the stats your trying to use — comparing a 16 match sample size to a 299 match sample size is a statistical sin — regardless of the actual volley sample size. With 299 different retrners, you’re going to obviously get much better data than with 16 different returners. Literally just a couple of really good returners in that sample of 16, and that accounts for your 4% discrepancy — so those stats are complete, absolute garbage — as would be shown by running some fairly basic statistics... it should be fairly obvious, though. Could you send me a link to the stats where you got it from, please?
As for Ivo coming to the net more often — you said it right there. They’re going to be going for the angles on the return, whereas Fed is going to be throwing it in as more of a changeup. The element of surprise alone, again, can account for the discrepancy... not that it was a reliable data set to begin with.
Freddy Cat
Professional
The serve stats you gave are well within reason, and a couple of those servers which i listed on the lower bound are clearly up for discussion. There is, however, a defining line going from someone like a Querrey serve to a Cilic serve. Federer’s serve is clearly overrated in this sense, when a majority of people (yes, a majority) would list it in the top 3.
As for versatility on the forehand, I agree. But from the baseline, I have to disagree — Del Potro can literally be like a wall from the baseline slapping forehands.
On the volleys, I agree with most of what you said... except Karlovic deals with low balls very well (not just for his height). Whether this be on half volleys or very low volleys — he deals with them as good as anyone, and has excellent touch. Obviously on the low volleys, not as good as Federer, but Fed is definitely not out of his league by a considerable amount in that department. Where Federer will excel better here is when the ball gets to that extremely low, nearly going behind you, type of ball. Where since Karlovic stands so upright (while this is a technical flaw, he makes do with it), getting control on those types of balls, like you said, with his height, is very difficult.
Freddy Cat
Professional
Dimitrov is up for discussion. The main point here is that Federer is a couple tiers down from even being a top 5 server — there’s huge separation there.
If Federer was truly top notch in all of these departments. Like how every Fed fab ranks him top three in literally every category, Nadal and Djokovic wouldn’t have a positive H2H against him. And no, you can’t attribute it to matchup when oh say his shots are that much better than either of the two.
Same thing with DelPo though. I’d love to know how someone with a serve that’s maybe top 20 has a 7-18 H2H with a guy with a “top 3 serve”. I’d love to know how a guy with a mediocre 2hbh beats a guy with a backhand “better than Gasquets”. I’d love to know how a guy who’s not even top 30 in volleys is beating “the beat volleyer in the world”. And I’d love to know how this guy with an absolute hammer of a forehand is beating a guy with “the best forehand in the world”. And oh, on top of that, he’s also the most versatile player in the world.
I’d love for you to rationally explain to me how those Fed fanboy rankings works out to a 7-18 H2H. It’s just not quite adding up for me. How has this guy even lost a match before? And no, I’m not pulling these Fed fan evaluations out of my arse. All of these things have been said in this thread. So I want you to tell me how he can be ranked so high by his fans in all of these categories, and then attribute that to his head to head records. And then i want you to try and tell me he’s not overrated.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
As well as the amount he fails to make. Sure, Ivo does better with volleys just barely in his reach (as they are out of reach for Federer), but they only make a small percentage of all volleys.
Or a couple of really bad ones. For every Andy Murray there's Jimmy Wang.
So, send me the stats that prove Karlovic is a better volleyer than Federer. Some stats, even admittedly limited, are better than nothing. All you've done is show two videos of some highlight points and claims Karlovic has better volleys on the basis of those videos (which doesn't even check with the videos themselves).
Freddy Cat
Professional
As I said before, the videos were ONLY a visual to see how they made their net approach.
Those stats are obviously better than nothing. But at the end of the day, the only thing conclusive about them is that the numbers are close. All I’m saying is that when you have a 4% discrepancy, in two completely different data sets, and you’re trying to come to something conclusive, it’s a statistical sin. I’d love to find some stats on it, and as you know, it’s very hard to come up with any that are meaningful — and I highly doubt they exist.
But at the end of the day, between your two data sets, the two numbers will be relatively close to one another. And the fact that people call me delusional about Karlovic having better volleys than Fed speaks volumes about how overrated he is. When there are no substantial stats to support otherwise. So while I’m not going to convince you stats-wise clearly about Ivo being BETTER, I think we can both be reasonable in saying that Federer’s S&V is overrated to Ivo’s. Obviously the discrepancy in the data could also very well work in the opposite direction — not being in Ivo’s favour. I wish I could satisfy this explanation more, but it’s really the best I can give.
It’s difficult to find data on players that people typically don’t care as much about. And even when you find a set of data, drawing comparisons from it is near impossible.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Admittedly I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek in response to your initial exaggeration than Federer's volley can't be compared to Karlovic's, which implies that Ivo's is much better. At least it's not much.
I actually like Karlovic, as I like the aggressive/big-serving style, and Ivo's extreme serving is a fun equaliser no matter who he plays. Of course he has a quality volley, otherwise he'd never have left challengers, can't win with just the serve alone. Even groundstroke winners can be found, the problem is consistency/movement (partially a trade-off for the size, though Isner is almost as big but at his best was able to show some great return/forehand masterclasses).
I still don't buy Karlovic being a better volleyer, but at any rate Federer isn't much better either, but S&V being Ivo's only viable option likely hurts his stats to an extent.
Ivo is mpre prone to lapses, though, think that's my point against him here. Again it's about limited options - if he happens to have an off-day at the net, it's going to spell doom, while Federer can always try something else with his bag of tricks, which IMO gave him a lot of wins against lesser opponents when he was lacking form (setting him apart for Nadal & Djokovic in that regard).
ron schaap
Hall of Fame
I don't understand the discussion going on. Under and overrated has nothing to do with stroke technique but with wrong perceptions.
Similar threads
