Search results

Any Nadal match ;) @vive le beau jeu !

Honestly, off the top of my head it wouldn't be Soderling, not particularly close, but I'm thinking about Roddick here. Matches like the 04 Wimbledon Final or the 07 USO QF. Matches where you could really hear the effort he was putting in, and all for naught. The 07 USO QF in particular.

I agree. I don't think his FH looks ugly at all these days, but if you go back to 05-06, that was ugly (but obviously effective especially on clay). It's actually changed over the years as he adapted more to HC and grass IMO.

Djokovic isn't winning the French Open. Don't kid yourself.

My reasoning for picking 05 is basically that I don't rate the Davydenko SF win that highly. Davydenko was a perennial choker against Federer in almost every way possible whereas Hewitt gave him a solid, extremely competitive match. Davy struggled to hold onto breaks and serve out sets, and lots...

Fine. Just your opinion. I think Hewitt and Agassi, especially with the levels they played at can be classified as better opponents than Davydenko and Roddick. Davydenko especially. And in Roddick's case he was never pressuring the Federer BH like Agassi. A lot of Federer's trouble were down to...

It's close for sure, but I don't think you go wrong with either. The final levels are similar. SF's probably go to 06, but Hewitt was a bit tougher than Davydenko as well I wasn't too impressed with his match against Blake in the 06 QF either. Or more specifically not that impressed with his...

Yeah I'd probably agree on the basis of level of play. In the big events: AO: 2005 definitely IW: 2005 Miami: 2006 I think he was better on clay in 2006 though. MC: 2006 Rome: 2006 Hamburg: N/A because Federer skipped 2006 RG: 2006, but it's close. I say 06 just for the 6-1 on Nadal...

Rome 2006. The one match from that entire year that I want back. Don't care about the others, not even RG. In hindsight having a BO5 win over Nadal on clay at Nadal's own peak would've been amazing.

That's why we're friends! :) Some of the other people on this thread deserve a good bashing, but I digress.

I could be wrong of course. In which case, my bad, mind meet gutter.

I don't think you and him are thinking about the same thing lol.

That's assuming he would've won of course. The favourite he would be, but we're not talking Nadal at RG here.

I think I'd like no lets, still not sure on no ad though. I like deuce-ad games, but I'd probably come around over time on no ad truthfully. The added suspense on a point that would normally be 40-40 would be interesting.

Don't agree that the Olympics is bigger than the WTF's. From a sporting perspective yes, but for the tennis aficionado I don't think that's true. I agree that it's become a big event since Nadal won it because he's arguably the greatest player ever so that helps increase the popularity of...

Djokovic at his absolute best cannot stop him either.

Like others have said, in short I think Nadal is greater, but Novak is better. I'm not even in the mood to explain why. It should be obvious.

Coming from a dude who couldn't return a beach ball I'm not surprised.

Funny, but painful to watch.

Thiem/Zverev shouldn't be first on anyone's list unless you absolutely hate both players. That's only hindsight talking. It's not even close on the basis of lack of pre match excitement to something as unexciting as RG 2013, USO 2017, or Wimbledon 2018 which were all foregone conclusions before...

Partly yes, with the USO incident and all the fall out perhaps, but Canada does have that problem to an extent even if you don't include Genie at all IMO. It's very "what have you done for me lately" especially in sports like tennis which is not very popular here, and only marginally more...

I'd give Med more than 2-3 years at the top due to advancements and the like, but I agree that he isn't an ATG talent (probably not a 5 major winner either) and that he may suffer injuries at 6'6 with his playing style.

This is true, but cherry picked or not, the stat is impressive. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here I just think the stat is impressive, and I think Federer fans would be flaunting it if it were the case for Federer at Wimbledon for instance. Say Federer retired post 2012 win and had...

I'd trust Med more than Thiem as well, but I don't think that's saying much. I don't trust either of them. And I think Medvedev just shows tightness in different ways. He probably makes more UE's in the net than he does long when the going gets tough, which is the opposite of Thiem I think. My...

If anybody is comparing him to Rafa at RG then they're wrong. Just wrong. As far as Fed goes, he'd be doing the same in Novak's position IMO. Unfortunately he is not in that position.

Sure, but he has beaten Wawrinka in a SF so it's not necessarily dismissed. It's just the way it turned out. You might just say he's undefeated once he makes the SF's of the AO, and even if he had one loss it's not the end of the world. It's not even like he's beaten weak sauce competition his...

I'd say Murray had better shots in a couple of his finals. I think Med is being overhyped here (though I haven't heard anyone call him the favourite), and I don't think his career will match Murray's when all is said and done either, weak era or not.

On the contrary I respected him even more. :D

It's not even that really. Yes the last few years he hasn't exactly ran the gauntlet, and Karatsev and Medvedev doesn't up the quality at all tbh, but he's beaten Nadal, Federer, Wawrinka, and Murray a ton of times so you have to give it to him. Fed would likely do the same in Novak's position...

No amount of finals makes up for an extra title.