Mustard
Bionic Poster
It was jaw dropping. Going into the match, I fancied Hewitt to pull off the upset. The way Federer won though, seemed to confirm he'd be around dominating for a while.
TTW SURVEY => Since when are you following Tennis with vivid memories and a proper understanding of Tennis ?
- Thread starter Adam Copeland
- Start date
It was jaw dropping. Going into the match, I fancied Hewitt to pull off the upset. The way Federer won though, seemed to confirm he'd be around dominating for a while.
dapchai
Legend
Yeah I remember Hewitt being hyped up a lot after his US Open series. Watched the final with my cousin (who already liked Federer back then) and he was so thrilled at how Fed made Hewitt run around the court to death. What a humiliation that was. IIRC I've rarely heard of Hewitt competing at the top level since then. Federer on the other hand would be called "FedEx" by many people around me (not sure if that was a common nickname for him).
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Why should that be a rule for anyone else? You can enjoy watching it that way, but I sometimes see videos of old matches and see the quality for what it is. I enjoyed many of those matches live on TV, but any match from the pre-poly or wooden racquet era looks pretty bad now and almost unwatchable for me as it looks like today‘s amateur level. I was a huge McEnroe and Sampras fan in those times when I was younger, but don’t enjoy watching their matches anymore when they show them on TV.
When I see a car from the Sixties or Seventies, I see a piece of old engineering - others see a ‘classic’ car. I am not too sentimental about old memories. So be it.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Hewitt tried very hard. Put in a great effort. Wasn't it 6-0, 2-0 to Federer after about half an hour or less? Hewitt managed to force a tiebreak in the second set. Once Federer won the tiebreak, a similar blitz came in the third set that had happened earlier in the match.
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
Again knowing only what came before in tennis, we were not used to the idea of a men's champion with longevity before Roger. I mean Sampras was the only one who was consistent enough to rack up a bunch of slams, but even he retired at the 'ripe' old age of 32.
Agassi was the new high-water mark (after the gen of Muscles and Connors of course) of someone playing into their 30s and still being a slam contender. And in his case, we presumed he had a second lease on life because of the time away from the sport.
We were more used to the idea of a player hitting prime, then fading away or getting burned out, injury sidelining them until they were a skeleton of their former self... so nothing was guaranteed.
What Fed did, and Rafa and Djoko have followed in his footsteps is to build on that previous gens and take all the great things from them and elevate it with consistency, professionalism, fitness, and smart scheduling.
Now Rafa and Djoko are pushing on those boundaries...
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Give today's players the racquets from then, and I doubt they play better.
dapchai
Legend
I felt really bad for Hewitt that match. Chasing down the ball hopelessly. My cousin even said Federer decided to let the second set go to tiebreak to make Hewitt feel easier, but in the end he still fed Hewitt another bagel.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Probably true, but who cares. Tennis is just an entertainment for me and I don’t play the mental gymnastics game of comparing players across eras. Old guys say the old players were better and young guys can’t understand what they are talking about.
You cannot separate technology from tennis. I can enjoy movies from my youth if they are character and story driven. But watching a science fiction movie from the Seventies or Eighties suffers badly because the technology is so outdated. Watching old tennis matches is like that for me and I would rather switch to a video of a modern epic match - there are no shortage of epics in every decade.
Last edited:
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
He was indeed called FedEx.
Another tidbit is that Hewitt was cocky as hell around then and possibly racist too (he had some tiff with Blake about the ump favoring him because both of them were black).
The way Hewitt was humiliated in that final, he came down a few notches. Don't remember him being the same afterwards.
Same thing with Roddick. Today he's all reason and intellect, but as a young contender he thought the mantle from Sampras and Agassi was automatically going to go to him.
Roger literally made him quit the sport. I remember an interview from Roddick where he said he threw all his trophies into a room and locked it because he did not want to be reminded that he even played the sport and how untalented he was compared to some of the 'other' players.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I don't recall ever seeing pre open tennis because it just wasn't televised. Pre open I think we mostly read about tennis, those of us who did not have money and means to go to pro matches. I don't recall being interested in amateur tennis. I started college in fall of 1966, and in those days there was almost no way to watch TV other than in some kind of public area. So I missed a lot. The first time I remember seeing a lot of TV coverage of tennis was around the time Connors burst upon the scene, though I remember the famous Dallas match between Laver and Rosewall. Laver and his group were all old to me, but Connors and Evert were both younger, then Borg, then Mac was much younger. They all seemed like kids to me when the broke through.
Adam Copeland
Hall of Fame
dapchai
Legend
The last thing I remembered about A-Rod was his 2009 final vs Fed. Both of them botting made me quite bored, but gladly Fed won in the end. Never heard of A-Rod back to business since then.
Martin J
Hall of Fame
Some interesting information, thanks.
The sad thing is that the theory about the mafia is probably true, but it's partially Diego's fault as well. I'm sure he'd loved all the benefits he had while enjoying their company during his years in Italy. And it never comes without a price.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Wimbledon used to be shown before the open era in the UK. My late nan used to tell me about Neale Fraser beating Rod Laver in the final, and Roy Emerson winning there, and Roger Taylor beating Rod Laver in 1970. Doctor Who, then in its very first season, was postponed in 1964 for a week because of Wimbledon coverage. 4 years later in 1968, Doctor Who was postponed for 2 weeks because of Wimbledon coverage.
Moon Shooter
Hall of Fame
I have never been able to follow pro tennis much at all. The horrible and spoiled behavior of so many pros as well as the current political nature of the personalities makes it very difficult to stomach.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
You are in the right place then, my man.
Steffi-forever
Hall of Fame
I remember during the 2004 AO, ESPN were airing an ad about Roddick and his chance of reaching Pete! However, Roger won the tournament and the next tennis magazine I received home, it was Roger with the trophy on the cover titled “ Federer Era”.
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
LOL yeah. I had a Tennis magazine subscription too...
Media folks are so fickle. I remember they took a while to warm up to Federer as the top honcho of the sport.... I guess everyone wanted another American to succeed to the throne, like Serena did on the women's side, instead of this Swiss dude.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Aye. Roddick was world number 1 then, reigning US Open champion, after a dominant summer in 2003, but it was Federer who finished 2003 very strongly in the last event and played what was probably the highest standard tennis during the whole year during that event. I can understand ESPN's optimism about Roddick at the time, but not reaching Sampras (I didn't even have that for Hewitt in my wildest imaginations). Roddick did look impressive at the 2004 Australian Open, and then Safin took him out in that 5-set epic of a quarter final.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
That was roughly a year after winning his first slam that they talked about a Federer era...that's pretty fast, no?
Steffi-forever
Hall of Fame
Yeah I though it was fabricated as it was obvious for a few years that Fed was the most talented player of his generation. It just took him a while to dominate.
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
That was roughly a year after winning his first slam that they talked about a Federer era...that's pretty fast, no?
I don't remember that particular cover, but I was referring to the general outlook of commentators and journalists in the US. And they weren't too happy having to talk about him as the face of the sport that he was about to become.
Whether it was Bud Collins, Bodo or the Tignor guy, they weren't happy about a non-American eclipsing the heir apparent and their commentary/articles reflected an underhanded element even when complimenting him.
I know because I used to scour all the articles available about him and read every post match interview... and being an American, those were the sources I had the best access to.
Again, I'm speaking of journos and folks running the magazine then. Former players went gaga over Fed in public so we don't know how they really felt; I'd assume they were honest about their enthusiasm.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
That period you're referencing was pretty short though; it became apparent pretty quickly that there was a big gap between Roger and the others and I don't recall anyone being taken seriously until Nadal (and initially he didn't get the greatest press in Anglophone countries either for quite some time).
That Tennis Magazine cover story is already talking about a Federer era in 2004
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
That period you're referencing was pretty short though; it became apparent pretty quickly that there was a big gap between Roger and the others and I don't recall anyone being taken seriously until Nadal (and initially he didn't get the greatest press in Anglophone countries either for quite some time).
That Tennis Magazine cover story is already talking about a Federer era in 2004
You seem upset that I said the media is fickle.
Steffi-forever
Hall of Fame
That cover was from the very famous Tennis Mag from France in Feb ‘04. One of the best tennis magazine ever!
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
I aee.
We had a Tennis magazine here in the US too. Got it for free with a USTA subscription. Same folks that run the tennis dot com site
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Not in the slightest. Just a bit confused because you yourself reference a cover story from Tennis Magazine from 2004 with the Federer era slogan so it seems like they were pretty quick to take up the Federer narrative, no? I was in North America and Western Europe in those years and I recall Roger getting great press fairly quickly (obviously well deserved press in his case)
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
That wasn't me. That was Steffi-forever who brought up a 'Federer Era' cover. I said I don't remember a cover like that in 2004...
Turns out she was referring to a French magazine of the same name.
Adam Copeland
Hall of Fame
That was roughly a year after winning his first slam that they talked about a Federer era...that's pretty fast, no?
Maybe that is Federer's greatness ???? Folks today call it a weak era but those who saw it back then felt very different.
I too remember Tennis back then as a small kid, Circa 2002-03 the guys who wore their cap backwards (Hewitt, Roddick) were touted by the media to rule as they wanted an Aussie/American to rule. But in 2004 the backward cap guys were all sidelined by the Pony Tailed Guy who won his first Sportsman of the year award and also was now touted as the guy to chase Sampras, it became so clear due to 12 months of utter domination.
It was quick because of the greatness of Federer in ascending to the top, but yes as the baseline era unraveled the next gen got physically stronger as the tour became more and more grindier and 2 beasts emerged, Nadal was the first and then Novak, that has shaped Tennis differently 15 years later.
Seth
Legend
I was in school at that time, so I didn’t watch it live. But when I got home from school that day ESPN2 was replaying the Roddick/El Aynaoui match in all its glory.
Borissimo
Rookie
There must not be too many sports that you can tolerate then...
BillKid
Hall of Fame
At that time, tennis especially on clay, was so slow in comparison with what we see now. Look at videos of Noah, Lendl, Wilander... And also a skinny Michael Chang winning in 1989. There were a lot of players not far from pushers at that time, honestly and I'm confident Nadal would have destroyed them.
Poly strings have made the game different and I would say in the 90's, things have become quite different, with players becoming in general more and more athletic at the same period. Most striking example is Kuerten of course. IMO, he raised tennis on clay to a new level. Don't really know if peak Kuerten would be able to defeat Nadal on clay. I'd like to say yes, but I don't believe so, not peak Nadal at least. A bit earlier, Muster was at times extremely dominant on clay (less impressive than Kuerten but still quite powerful). In the 90's, there were some great clay players like Ferrero, Corretja or Costa, but I'm pretty sure all of them would have been crushed by Nadal on clay.
It's difficult to compare different era (again different strings and racquets, players more and more athletic and scientifically prepared, etc..) and I don't want to show disrespect to players of the pre-Nadal era, but I think it's pretty clear that Nadal is head and shoulder above the rest when it comes to playing on clay. It's unbelievable, this man has won 13 RG.
Crisstti
Legend
I started watching more seriously when Marcelo Rios began his climb to the top, around 95-96. Liked Agassi as well, found Sampras (and in general any bog server) boring.
Marcelo Rios was HUGE here, the streets were practically empty when he played an important match.
Used to love Martina Hingins as well back then.
Used to watch some tennis in a casual way before that. Davis Cup matches and some others. Can't imagine there were a lot of matches on tv then. I remember liking Monica Seles and the video of her stabbing in the news is one of my earliest clear tennis memories.
Anyway, once Rios retired I lost quite a bit of interest and followed tennis more casually. Only remember vividly the 2001 Wimbledon and the 2004 RG finals from that period.
Somehow missed Fed's ascent to the top and only remember him being there, dominating everyone. Found it boring. Only got really excited for tennis again when I happened to watch the clay Masters finals between Rafa and Fed in 2006, and then RG. He brought excitement back to tennis as far as I was concerned. But I only became a really big fan after the 2007 Wimbledon final.
Great thread btw, had a lot of fun reading through it.
Marcelo Rios was HUGE here, the streets were practically empty when he played an important match.
Used to love Martina Hingins as well back then.
Used to watch some tennis in a casual way before that. Davis Cup matches and some others. Can't imagine there were a lot of matches on tv then. I remember liking Monica Seles and the video of her stabbing in the news is one of my earliest clear tennis memories.
Anyway, once Rios retired I lost quite a bit of interest and followed tennis more casually. Only remember vividly the 2001 Wimbledon and the 2004 RG finals from that period.
Somehow missed Fed's ascent to the top and only remember him being there, dominating everyone. Found it boring. Only got really excited for tennis again when I happened to watch the clay Masters finals between Rafa and Fed in 2006, and then RG. He brought excitement back to tennis as far as I was concerned. But I only became a really big fan after the 2007 Wimbledon final.
Great thread btw, had a lot of fun reading through it.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal is like Muster style wise, and Vilas. Although Nadal has a two-handed backhand.
Muster's clay streak was much more impressive than Kuerten's, as he was 111-5 in 1995-1996 combined. Kuerten was more the sort of player that needed to find a groove during matches, even in 2001, and sometimes didn't. In the open era, only Muster and Borg ever got that same aura on clay of dominance that Nadal had. Vilas in the second half of 1977 had it for a short time too.
Last edited:
Borissimo
Rookie
Can you imagine Chang moonballing Rafa? That would be something.
BillKid
Hall of Fame
You are right about Muster.
My point is that when Kuerten popped up, he showed a game that was more impressive than what we saw before. At least that’s what I felt at that time. Some may say it was a more « modern game » kind of playstyle. There was almost no match against Bruguera in the 1997 RF final, whereas Bruguera was still a great clay player, two times RG winner. Not a coincidence that he was one of first to bring poly strings to the game, although he was of course extremely skilled.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Yes. Kuerten also used poly strings early on.
BillKid
Hall of Fame
I was just editing my post when you mentioned this
GhostOfNKDM
Hall of Fame
He was a trendsetter in this regard. Many pros switched to at least a hybrid setup in the wake of his success.
roysid
Hall of Fame
From a remote part of India, in my childhod i first saw in newspaper in 1986 about a German golden boy called Boris Becker or Boom Boom Becker who won Wimbledon two times
That ignited my passion and i started following the game from 1987.
Another german girl appeared the scene in 1987 and instantly become my favorite.
State run television used to show the semis and finals of Wimbledon and French Open. So those were my first matches seen at neighbours house ( our own TV was broke)
The first matches i saw was 1987 lendl wilander and 1987 lendl cash final
That ignited my passion and i started following the game from 1987.
Another german girl appeared the scene in 1987 and instantly become my favorite.
State run television used to show the semis and finals of Wimbledon and French Open. So those were my first matches seen at neighbours house ( our own TV was broke)
The first matches i saw was 1987 lendl wilander and 1987 lendl cash final
Few in the forum don't think that I am a Novak fan when I post anything to support Federer or Nadal.
Like I said earlier in the thread I became a big Federer fan 2004/05 onwards and I still love his game (pity we dont get to see it) .. 2011 Novak came big time and his fighting spirit was simply out of the world. To take up the biggest challenge in tennis and succeed was awesome (I have something for the underdog story
). I started to appreciate Nadal a lot more from 2017 as I was part of the group that believed, given his playing style, he would not last long. His struggles in 2015-16 seemed to confirm that. Then to come out of that and win multiple slams just showed how wrong people were in underestimating his talent. The Novak turnaround of 2018 was also simply amazing given how he spiraled down mentally in Pepe era and struggled for nearly 2 years (classic Phoenix ).So all in all - today it doesn't matter to me who wins. I said on the match day that I really felt for Nadal when he got broken while serving for the match the first time. I wanted him to win.
roysid
Hall of Fame
There's an interesting fact about Boris Beckers win in 1985. One person bet 10000 pounsmdson Becker winning Wimbledon at 1-18. The money he earned was more than what Becker got after winning Wimbledon.
Used to keenly follow Beckers matches at Wimbledon every year since 88. But except 1989, he never could win. Suffered unexpected losses to Edberg, Stich and Agassi. And when he finally beat Stich and Agassi, Sampras was unbreakable.
Becker and Steffi were absolute favorite.
Later Beckers place was taken by Federer. And Becker with his antics became unlikeable.
Disliked Seles initially. But after the stabbing, supported her the most even above Steffi
Thriller
Hall of Fame
These are such important observations that really highlight just how extraordinary Rafa's dominance has been.
spottishwood
Hall of Fame
What if some of 'em lied
Similar threads
