A big pie in the face of "weak era" theorists!

JumpSmash · Jun 27, 2011

You guys who expound the ridiculous theory of "weak era" should feel very ashamed of yourselves! I'm glad the 4th round lineup at SW19 this year has put you all to eternal shame

Eight of the players in the 4th round are 29 years or older! In other words, HALF of the players who will play on super Monday are from the so called "weak era". For you doubters, I'll list the players in this category:

Lopez
Fish
Kubot
Youzhny
Federer
Malisse
Ferrer
Llodra

In conclusion, you ****s who like to denigrate Federer's achievements by saying he played in a "weak era" should run with your tails between your legs and return to the dark caves you came from!

mellowyellow · Jun 27, 2011

Lol.... None of them save for Fish are in their playing prime, and only because he was such a late bloomer and never physically pushed himself as a youth.

8PAQ · Jun 27, 2011

mellowyellow said:
Lol.... None of them save for Fish are in their playing prime, and only because he was such a late bloomer and never physically pushed himself as a youth.

Right, so players from Fed's area are doing great in current area even thou they are playing way past their primes. Only shows further that 2004 - 2007 was the stronger area which is why Nadal couldn't even get to a semi at USO. Guys like Youzhny or Blake would take him out in early rounds. Last year Nadal won only because Youzhny was way past his prime.

Manus Domini · Jun 27, 2011

JumpSmash said:
You guys who expound the ridiculous theory of "weak era" should feel very ashamed of yourselves! I'm glad the 4th round lineup at SW19 this year has put you all to eternal shame Eight of the players in the 4th round are 29 years or older! In other words, HALF of the players who will play on super Monday are from the so called "weak era". For you doubters, I'll list the players in this category:

Lopez
Fish
Kubot
Youzhny
Federer
Malisse
Ferrer
Llodra

In conclusion, you ****s who like to denigrate Federer's achievements by saying he played in a "weak era" should run with your tails between your legs and return to the dark caves you came from!

Even better than that:

Kubot is a 29 yo doubles specialist ranked 93 in singles who never got to the 4th round of a slam before.

Malisse hasn't gotten to the 4th round of Wimbledon since 2004

Llodra is a doubles specialist, and this is his first time getting to the 4th round of Wimbedon

This is the first time Fish has gotten to the 4th round of Wimbledon

Ferrer is a clay court specialist

Now, if that isn't enough to show this is really a weak era, Del Potro has been out for a year, yet this is the farthest he's gotten at Wimbledon

Seriously, who claims this is a super strong era and Fed's was weak? :?

8PAQ · Jun 27, 2011

Also, imagine what Nadal's H2H with Denko would have been if he played him lets say 4 times in hard court slams few years ago. 4-10 instead of 4-6.

Manus Domini · Jun 27, 2011

I love how players like Fish couldn't break into the top 10 in a weak era, but can in a strong era lol

tennis_pro · Jun 27, 2011

Furthermore, as I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, the average rank of a top 20 player nowadays is 27,15

A player who is 27 nowadays was 20-24 in 2004-2007. How do you explain the fact that a player in his peak years at 20-24 achieves more nowadays when he's close to 30? If the current generation is so strong, why are there only 3 (THREE) who haven't turned 25 yet (Gasquet, Murray, Djokovic) in the top 20 and as for now there are only 3 legitimate contenders for Slams - Djokovic, Federer and Nadal?

This era is **** easy compared to Fed's facing prime Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Ferrero just to name a few.

I wanna see those who dissed Ljubicic for being no 3 in the world around 2005/2006. How did a 32-year Ljubicic take a set off and play a tough 4-setter against a prime Murray on grass?

srinrajesh · Jun 27, 2011

Well in Federer's "strong" era 2004 -2007 he had various great players to fight him -apart from pre prime 21 year old Nadal

He had No.3 ranked players like Ljubicic and Davydenko to fight him in slam finals or No.4 James Blake to fight off in SF's ..

Wait a minute .. did they really attain that ranking by reaching slam finals and SF's regularly ... Go figure.
*******s do want to prove the stats that Fed .. prevailed in strong era of Ljubicic, Davydenko, Blake .... ROTFL

Guess this is weaker era than 2004-2007 with Federer being No.3, Murray 4th,Soderling 5th..Slam winner Delpo to reach that group soon after his injury break

So Fed fans are saying Ljubicic, Davydenko >> Federer .. good argument

tennis_pro · Jun 27, 2011

srinrajesh said:
Well in Federer's "strong" era 2004 -2007 he had various great players to fight him -apart from pre prime 21 year old Nadal

He had No.3 ranked players like Ljubicic and Davydenko to fight him in slam finals or No.4 James Blake to fight off in SF's ..

Wait a minute .. did they really attain that ranking by reaching slam finals and SF's regularly ... Go figure.
*******s do want to prove the stats that Fed .. prevailed in strong era of Ljubicic, Davydenko, Blake .... ROTFL

Guess this is weaker era than 2004-2007 with Federer being No.3, Murray 4th,Soderling 5th.. So Fed fans are saying Ljubicic, Davydenko >> Federer .. good argument

How did a 31, 32-year old Ljubicic beat Nadal in Indian Wells last year. How did he play a tough setter against Murray on grass a couple days ago?
How did Davydenko win the last 4 meetings with Nadal, including one in 2011 - a year in which he's been aweful.
How did Blake use to pwn Nadal on hard courts back in his prime years 2005-2006?

By the why, quote in bold. Both info is complete rubbish taken out of your a**. Federer played Blake twice in Slam quarters and Fed faced Ljubicic as many as 0 times in Slams, yet you mention Slam finals LOL.

Freaking Baghdatis, Gonzalez or Philippoussis would be all top tenners nowadays playing the level that got them to Slam finals. This is a **** era

zagor · Jun 27, 2011

srinrajesh said:
Well in Federer's "strong" era 2004 -2007 he had various great players to fight him -apart from pre prime 21 year old Nadal

He had No.3 ranked players like Ljubicic and Davydenko to fight him in slam finals or No.4 James Blake to fight off in SF's ..

Wait a minute .. did they really attain that ranking by reaching slam finals and SF's regularly ... Go figure.
*******s do want to prove the stats that Fed .. prevailed in strong era of Ljubicic, Davydenko, Blake .... ROTFL

Guess this is weaker era than 2004-2007 with Federer being No.3, Murray 4th,Soderling 5th.. So Fed fans are saying Ljubicic, Davydenko >> Federer .. good argument

Fed's main opponents in slams in his era were Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, older Agassi and young Nadal, he never played Ljubicic in a slam ever.

Netzroller · Jun 27, 2011

tennis_pro said:
Furthermore, as I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, the average rank of a top 20 player nowadays is 27,15

A player who is 27 nowadays was 20-24 in 2004-2007. How do you explain the fact that a player in his peak years at 20-24 achieves more nowadays when he's close to 30?

You could also draw the conclusion that peak years are not 20-24 for everyone, and that some of them might be better at age 27 than ever before.

zagor · Jun 27, 2011

tennis_pro said:
How did a 31, 32-year old Djokovic beat Nadal in Indian Wells last year. How did he play a tough setter against Murray on grass a couple days ago?

How did Davydenko win the last 4 meetings with Nadal, including one in 2011 - a year in which he's been aweful.

How did Blake use to pwn Nadal on hard courts back in his prime years 2005-2006?

It's Ljubicic, not Djokovic.

Don't forget Roddick beating Nadal on HC in Rafa's best years(2008 and 2010) or Youzhny reaching USO SF last year.

Furthemore Rafa himself won half of his FOs during that era, I guess we can discount those as well.

The Hermit · Jun 27, 2011

I always don't buy the weak era crap. Federer and Nadal are so dominant that they make this era look weak.

tennis_pro · Jun 27, 2011

Netzroller said:
You could also draw the conclusion that peak years are not 20-24 for everyone, and that some of them might be better at age 27 than ever before.

still nearly all of those players were around 23-24 during Federer's peak years. How come they get to top 10 nowadays, I thought they would be eaten alive by the current generation, right?

Instead we got Fish beating Murray 3 times in the last year. Melzer beating Fedal in the last year, Ferrer being a top 4 clay court player in the last 2 years with Verdasco coming close to him. Lopez at 30 reaches his third Slam quarter, there are just tons and tons of examples. There is not such thing as a 1985-1989 generation. There's only Nadal, Djokovic and Murray who can't even win a set in a Slam final and pressure eats him up often

tennis_pro · Jun 27, 2011

zagor said:
It's Ljubicic, not Djokovic.

Don't forget Roddick beating Nadal on HC in Rafa's best years(2008 and 2010) or Youzhny reaching USO SF last year.

Furthemore Rafa himself won half of his FOs during that era, I guess we can discount those as well.

typo, thx for correcting

srinrajesh · Jun 27, 2011

tennis_pro said:
Furthermore, as I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, the average rank of a top 20 player nowadays is 27,15

A player who is 27 nowadays was 20-24 in 2004-2007. How do you explain the fact that a player in his peak years at 20-24 achieves more nowadays when he's close to 30? If the current generation is so strong, why are there only 3 (THREE) who haven't turned 25 yet (Gasquet, Murray, Djokovic) in the top 20 and as for now there are only 3 legitimate contenders for Slams - Djokovic, Federer and Nadal?

This era is **** easy compared to Fed's facing prime Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Ferrero just to name a few.

I wanna see those who dissed Ljubicic for being no 3 in the world around 2005/2006. How did a 32-year Ljubicic take a set off and play a tough 4-setter against a prime Murray on grass?

Do you follow tennis at all .. How many slams did prime Fed win at age 21 -zero .. Except Teenage prodigies like Becker, Borg most tennis players reach their prime between 22 and 28 then are on decline a little upto 29/30 and then play towards 32-33 before retiring..

tennis_pro · Jun 27, 2011

srinrajesh said:
Do you follow tennis at all .. How many slams did prime Fed win at age 21 -zero .. Except Teenage prodigies like Becker, Borg most tennis players reach their prime between 22 and 28 then are on decline a little upto 29/30 and then play towards 32-33 before retiring..

Look at the recent Slam winners, then.

Federer-2003- first Slam aged 21 years 11 months
Roddick-2003 first Slam aged 21 years 1 month
Nadal 2005 - first Slam aged 19 years 0 months
Djokovic 2008 - first Slam aged 20 years 6 months
Del Potro 2009 - first Slam aged 20 years 11 months

Every single 1st-slam winner since 2003 has been young. I don't Gaudio cause it was a fluke win, 22-year old Coria should've won that match. Apart from that it's been only young winners

Where's your 29/30

srinrajesh · Jun 27, 2011

zagor said:
It's Ljubicic, not Djokovic.

Don't forget Roddick beating Nadal on HC in Rafa's best years(2008 and 2010) or Youzhny reaching USO SF last year.

Furthemore Rafa himself won half of his FOs during that era, I guess we can discount those as well.

Gud .. so discounting those years- Federer loses 11 slams between 2004 and 2007 and Nadal loses 3
so actual slams in strong ere Nadal 7 , Federer 5

zagor · Jun 27, 2011

srinrajesh said:
Gud .. so discounting those years- Federer loses 11 slams between 2004 and 2007 and Nadal loses 3
so actual slams in strong ere Nadal 7 , Federer 5

Strong era, weak era Federer's slam winning pace dropped off because of his decline mainly however by implying that Nadal won 3 FOs in weak era it would mean he can't be put on the same level as Borg as far as CC greatness goes.

tennis_pro · Jun 27, 2011

srinrajesh said:
Gud .. so discounting those years- Federer loses 11 slams between 2004 and 2007 and Nadal loses 3
so actual slams in strong ere Nadal 7 , Federer 5

A little hypocrite aren't we? If you agreed that the current era is weak, let's discount the Slams won after 2007.

Federer has 12, Nadal has 3, thx for playing.

Manus Domini · Jun 27, 2011

zagor said:
Strong era, weak era Federer's slam winning pace dropped off because of his decline mainly however by implying that Nadal won 3 FOs in weak era it would mean he can't be put on the same level as Borg as far as CC greatness goes.

Also, how could Nadal not win a HC slam in a weak era, but he can in a strong era? Is the weaker competition that much better than stronger competition?

bms2011 · Jun 27, 2011

What those people don't know is, who in Nadal's era was different than Federer's? If anything Fed had a tougher era with a prime Hewwit, Phillipousis, Safin, Roddick etc.

FedExpress 333 · Jun 27, 2011

Federer just made Roddick, Blake, Phillipousis, and Davy look weak. They are verrrrry good players!!!! Davydenko even beat Nadal the last 4 meetings, but he plays a crap schedule. Roddick beat Nadal on HC, in his prime years! Federer was just that good.

beast of mallorca · Jun 27, 2011

FedExpress 333 said:
Federer just made Roddick, Blake, Phillipousis, and Davy look weak. They are verrrrry good players!!!! Davydenko even beat Nadal the last 4 meetings, but he plays a crap schedule. Roddick beat Nadal on HC, in his prime years! Federer was just that good.

The question is, does Roddick, Blake, Phillipousis and Davy have the same calibre of game as Delpo, Djoko or Murray (contemporaries of Nadal) ?

I'm not one to call an era weak or not. Maybe not as strong as the present group of players or past groups of players.

FedExpress 333 · Jun 27, 2011

TBH, 2003 Rodick was much better than murray, and Davydenko, by theory, is the best rival of Nadal, considering the last 4 losses Nadal has suffered at his hands? Del po is actually pretty good, but mostly on HC. He even took Nadal to a 4 setter, but nadal had some *ahem* verrrry conveniently timed injuries...

ibbi · Jul 1, 2011

Apparently some people have never heard of a thing called late blooming. Hell, Soderling was around during those years, Berdych, Verdasco too, they're all clearly better players today than they were then.

fps · Jul 1, 2011

eh, 7 of these players then went out. the strength of the field is always about whether there are multiple players who are champions competing for titles. Take the top 4 out of any era and it would look rubbish. Or perhaps the players below would be hailed as heroes?

jackson vile · Jul 1, 2011

Don't forget Federer himself said that this current field is much more difficult.

Manus Domini · Jul 1, 2011

ibbi said:
Apparently some people have never heard of a thing called late blooming. Hell, Soderling was around during those years, Berdych, Verdasco too, they're all clearly better players today than they were then.

Well, then the almost every player in the top 20 is a late bloomer.

And, just so you know, base-liners are generally early bloomers. So that argument is pretty weak

ibbi · Jul 1, 2011

It's a weak argument that Soderling, Verdasco and Berdych are all better than they were 5 years ago? Okay...:neutral:

And so what if they are all late bloomers? Most players are...

NadalAgassi · Jul 1, 2011

ibbi said:
It's a weak argument that Soderling, Verdasco and Berdych are all better than they were 5 years ago? Okay...:neutral:

And so what if they are all late bloomers? Most players are...

It is a weak argument to pretend that players like Verdasco are at any point in time even relevant in the first place, or that a player like Berdych was anything more than a flash in the pan who never shone that brightly even during that flash.

ibbi · Jul 1, 2011

They may not be capable of winning slams, but they are, or very recently were top 10 players, making quarter finals on a pretty regular basis, and that was certainly not the case back then.

NadalAgassi · Jul 1, 2011

Verdasco was never making slam quarters on a regular basis. The guy has only made 3 slam quarters his whole career. Even if you look at only 2009/2010 he only made 3 of 8. Guys like Nalbandian, Davydenko, even mocked players like Robredo were much better top 10 players than Verdasco. Verdasco is like prime James Blake, but with less ability to beat top players like Nadal, win even smallish tournaments, or any of the appeal or excitement.

Berdych was a flash in the pan. He was a top 20/top 30 player for years, had a magical year and mostly magical 6 weeks, and is now going back to being a top 20/top 30 player, and if he stays top 10 with his performances this year it only proves how weak and definitely NOT improved the current top 10 is. He has made only 4 slam quarters his whole career. In his 2010-early 2011 peak he has lost 1st or 2nd round at 3 of the 6 slams he played.

These guys arent part of tougher competition for the top players. How can Verdasco be, he cant even beat Federer or Nadal now, LOL!

Manus Domini · Jul 2, 2011

ibbi said:
It's a weak argument that Soderling, Verdasco and Berdych are all better than they were 5 years ago? Okay...:neutral:

And so what if they are all late bloomers? Most players are...

Most players?

*cough*

sorry, was choking out of disbelief.

In the world of baseline tennis, blooming late is almost never seen. Baseliners come out earlier than S&V players. Borg, Nadal, Guga, Chang.

On top of that, Verdasco and Berdych are huge chokers, and Soderling got two lucky slam finals.

Manus Domini · Jul 2, 2011

ibbi said:
They may not be capable of winning slams, but they are, or very recently were top 10 players, making quarter finals on a pretty regular basis, and that was certainly not the case back then.

Exactly. They can make quarters now because the competition is weaker than it used to be...

Manus Domini · Jul 2, 2011

NadalAgassi said:
Verdasco is like prime James Blake, but with less ability to beat top players like Nadal, win even smallish tournaments, or any of the appeal or excitement.

Not even like prime James Blake. Blake broke his neck and suffered from career threatening shingles (IIRC). If those hadn't happened, Blake might've actually been a better top 10 player than he was due to those injuries.

pringles · Jul 2, 2011

Tennis has never been as weak as this. If a guy like Andy Murray (don't get me wrong, I like the guy, just don't think he belongs to the top tier, at least not YET) constantly reaches Slam finals/semis and is a no match for the top 3, that tells me the whole story. Even 5 years ago in 2005 the depth was bigger and heck, 2005 is nothing compared to, say, 1990-1993. The top 3 is OK even though Federer is far from his best 2006. It's a 2 man contest really. I would not be shocked if Djokovic and Nadal collected every GS trophy in the next 2-3 years.

fruitytennis1 · Jul 2, 2011

In general at this time the field is quite weak...except for the top.
The top being people who are actually slam threats-Fed, Nadal, Djoke, Murray(Just kidding), and Delpo.
IMO stronger than what Fed faced during his time on the throne

NadalAgassi · Jul 2, 2011

Del Potro is overrated on these boards. I really like the guy and his game and hope he gets back to win more slams. However at this point the only thing of remote importance he ever won was that one U.S Open. He doesnt even have a Masters title. If it wasnt for the U.S Open his biggest titles would be a few 500 titles. And even Djokovic and Murray own him in head to head.

Del Potro as yet has proven nothing to say he is better than prime Roddick, Hewitt, or Safin. If he didnt win that U.S Open final he would be clearly inferior to Nalbandian and Davydenko as well.

pringles · Jul 2, 2011

NadalAgassi said:
Del Potro is overrated on these boards. I really like the guy and his game and hope he gets back to win more slams. However at this point the only thing of remote importance he ever won was that one U.S Open. He doesnt even have a Masters title. If it wasnt for the U.S Open his biggest titles would be a few 500 titles. And even Djokovic and Murray own him in head to head.

Del Potro as yet has proven nothing to say he is better than prime Roddick, Hewitt, or Safin. If he didnt win that U.S Open final he would be clearly inferior to Nalbandian and Davydenko as well.

I agree 100 %. I'm really sorry for the guy, he would be really something in 2010 if it wasn't for the injury. It's gonna take him at least a couple of months before he reaches his old form IF he's gonna reach it at all (hope he does, love his game). It turns out that he's got 2 years taken out of his "prime" and he's barely started in 2009. Let's hope he can make it up in the future.

Manus Domini · Jul 2, 2011

pringles said:
I agree 100 %. I'm really sorry for the guy, he would be really something in 2010 if it wasn't for the injury. It's gonna take him at least a couple of months before he reaches his old form IF he's gonna reach it at all (hope he does, love his game). It turns out that he's got 2 years taken out of his "prime" and he's barely started in 2009. Let's hope he can make it up in the future.

It's his fault. He beat Nadal. Uncle Toni told him something bad would happen lol

But yea, aside from the top 3, the rest of the field is pretty weak. It was way stronger before, and before it still had both Nadal and Federer

ABCD · Feb 13, 2019

tennis_pro said:
Furthermore, as I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, the average rank of a top 20 player nowadays is 27,15

A player who is 27 nowadays was 20-24 in 2004-2007. How do you explain the fact that a player in his peak years at 20-24 achieves more nowadays when he's close to 30? If the current generation is so strong, why are there only 3 (THREE) who haven't turned 25 yet (Gasquet, Murray, Djokovic) in the top 20 and as for now there are only 3 legitimate contenders for Slams - Djokovic, Federer and Nadal?

This era is **** easy compared to Fed's facing prime Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Ferrero just to name a few.

I wanna see those who dissed Ljubicic for being no 3 in the world around 2005/2006. How did a 32-year Ljubicic take a set off and play a tough 4-setter against a prime Murray on grass?

Interesting opinion that 2011 was weak era and that 27 years-old players are old.

tennis_pro · Feb 13, 2019

ABCD said:
Interesting opinion that 2011 was weak era and that 27 years-old players are old.

Wow you have no life.

Would've done the same to you, unfortunately you're not worth my time.

ABCD · Feb 13, 2019

tennis_pro said:
Wow you have no life.

Would've done the same to you, unfortunately you're not worth my time.

You are a comedy gold. Thank you for writing. I know that your time is precious as demonstrated by a minimal number of TTW posts, only ~40K. Your problem with digging my comedy posts is that there are none. I was always right.

tennis_pro · Feb 13, 2019

ABCD said:
You are a comedy gold. Thank you for writing. I know that your time is precious as demonstrated by minimal number of TTW posts, only ~40K. Your problem with digging my comedy posts is that there are none. I was always right.

Only a total fool would say that.

ABCD · Feb 13, 2019

tennis_pro said:
Only a total fool would say that.

As opposed to me, I know that you are very busy, but when you have little bit time try to dig something on TTW where I was comical. In 2015 when Federer fans talked about retirement, I said multiple times that Federer is improving and that he will win more. Everything I said was right. Find out when I was wrong.

tennis_pro · Feb 13, 2019

ABCD said:
As opposed to me, I know that you are very busy, but when you have little bit time try to dig something on TTW where I was comical. In 2015 when Federer fans talked about retirement, I said multiple times that Federer is improving and that he will win more. Everything I said was right. Find out when I was wrong.

ABCD said:
For me, Murray is clearly an ATG. He competed against the field that included 3 best players ever and his 3 majors are more than 6-7 majors in some other eras. Plus masters, OGs and overall consistency of his play makes him a legend.[/QUOTE

ABCD said:
When Federer was bagged by many of his fans to retire, I predicted that he is going further to improve and be a genuine contender. While many Federer fans were crying that he is old I said that he is not, that he plays better than ever and that only thing required was Djokovic out of his way. That is what happened. Federer was able to beat Nadal 5 times in a row and win 3GS. Many Federer's fans on this forum own me an apology including abmk.

Oh and this:

ABCD said:
Murray is ATG and in any other era would have 5-15 majors (he still could end his career with 5-10). He is better player than Roddick, Safin or Hewitt. Murray is level of Becker, Edberg, Wilander.

I just took the first couple of pages, you're a genius, man. Any other fascinating opinions?

uscwang · Feb 13, 2019

JumpSmash said:
You guys who expound the ridiculous theory of "weak era" should feel very ashamed of yourselves! I'm glad the 4th round lineup at SW19 this year has put you all to eternal shame Eight of the players in the 4th round are 29 years or older! In other words, HALF of the players who will play on super Monday are from the so called "weak era". For you doubters, I'll list the players in this category:

Lopez
Fish
Kubot
Youzhny
Federer
Malisse
Ferrer
Llodra

In conclusion, you ****s who like to denigrate Federer's achievements by saying he played in a "weak era" should run with your tails between your legs and return to the dark caves you came from!

Of these fabulous 8 almost-30ers, 0 reached the semifinals. Meet Djokovic, Nadal, Murray, and Tsonga.

ABCD · Feb 13, 2019

Absolutely right. Murray's 3 majors are are, at least, 6-7 normal ones. (as Agassi concurred).

ABCD · Feb 13, 2019

tennis_pro said:
Only a total fool would say that.

You can also cite my numerous statements that "Djokovic is the GOAT" due to 9+4+1.. That is right also.

A big pie in the face of "weak era" theorists!

Rookie

Legend

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

srinrajesh

Guest

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Bionic Poster

Semi-Pro

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

srinrajesh

Guest

Bionic Poster

srinrajesh

Guest

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Banned

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

NadalAgassi

Guest

G.O.A.T.

NadalAgassi

Guest

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Professional

NadalAgassi

Guest

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Similar threads