2000 USO Safin vs. 2010 USO Nadal/2011 USO Djokovic

[Devin]

Welp, entertaining hypothetical IMO. I could put Federer instead of Djokodal but there wouldn't be as much of a debate. 2004/2006 Federer probably beats 2000 Safin in 4 tight sets. 2005 Federer probably barely edges him out in 5 mainly due to clutchness that he displayed against Hewitt and to an extent against Agassi. 2007/2008 Federer, Safin probably wins.

Here, I think Safin probably wins in 4 tight or 5 sets. It would be cool to watch though, a guy with a huge serve, pretty good movement and a great forehand+backhand combo against Nadal serving at his very best with his forehand in one of its best forms or the aggressive version of peak Djokovic.

What do you guys think?

 

[Raining hopes]

Before people go off without having an Idea of each three performances :


PLEASE RESPECT THE PAST BOTH DISTANT AND RECENT.

Safin, Djokovic , Nadal gave their all.

A FAMOUS/MORE POPULAR NAME SHOULDN'T OVERSHADOW PERFORMANCES.



For me it is Djokovic 2011 > Safin = Nadal

 

[JoelSandwich]

I’d go with safin

 

[tarutani]

Nadal2013>>Djoker2011>>Nadal2010>>Fed2006>>Hewitt2001>>Safin2000

2004Fed is crazy overrated.

 

[Raining hopes]

Nadal2013>>Djoker2011>>Nadal2010>>Fed2006>>Hewitt2001>>Safin2000

2004Fed is crazy overrated.

This is a new trend I am seeing, I can't understand why 2013 is so better than 2010. In fact I think 2010 USO might be Rafa's best ever non clay tournament.

 

[Devin]

This is a new trend I am seeing, I can't understand why 2013 is so better than 2010. In fact I think 2010 USO might be Rafa's best ever non clay tournament.

Recency bias, and probably the fact that he faced 2013 Djokovic instead of 2010 Djokovic. However, anyone who actually watched the matches would know that Djokovic played better in the 2010 final. There were different shades of Nadal in the two finals: 2010 was more aggressive with better serving, 2013 was more passive and slicing the BH more.

Nadal's 2013 run is honestly overrated IMO. I hate seeing the YouTube comments saying that peak Federer wouldn't beat him. Absolutely ridiculous.

That guy is a troll anyway.

 

[Raining hopes]

Recency bias, and probably the fact that he faced 2013 Djokovic instead of 2010 Djokovic. However, anyone who actually watched the matches would know that Djokovic played better in the 2010 final. There were different shades of Nadal in the two finals: 2010 was more aggressive with better serving, 2013 was more passive and slicing the BH more.

Nadal's 2013 run is honestly overrated IMO. I hate seeing the YouTube comments saying that peak Federer wouldn't beat him. Absolutely ridiculous.

That guy is a troll anyway.

I am not saying 2013 wasn't an absolute beast, it would be injustice to describe him any other way. Just that 2010 was crazy good, maybe better on Forehand and with the crazy serve.

 

[NoleFam]

2004 Fed was taken to 5 sets by 34 year old Agassi but he defeats 2000 Safin in 4 sets? This is a man who dismantled Sampras who didn't play badly as compared to that 2001 final. 2004 Fed is really overrated on here because he double bageled Hewitt who really was not that good in the final and Federer himself did not have the numbers as clean as Safin's. Safin hit 36 winners and 12 unforced errors, which is crazy, in that final against a tougher opponent and never got broken. Hewitt only hit 12 winners in the 2004 final compared to 28 from Sampras in 2000, and Sampras forced more errors. 2000 Safin was a beast. 2010 Nadal does not beat 2011 Djokovic so that excludes him by process of elimination. So between 2000 Safin and 2011 Djokovic I am going with a 5 setter with the slight edge to Safin.

 

[mike danny]

2004 Fed was taken to 5 sets by 34 year old Agassi but he defeats 2000 Safin in 4 sets? This is a man who dismantled Sampras who didn't play badly as compared to that 2001 final. 2004 Fed is really overrated on here because he double bageled Hewitt who really was not that good in the final and Federer himself did not have the numbers as clean as Safin's. Safin hit 36 winners and 12 unforced errors, which is crazy, in that final against a tougher opponent and never got broken. Hewitt only hit 12 winners in the 2004 final compared to 28 from Sampras in 2000, and Sampras forced more errors. 2000 Safin was a beast. 2010 Nadal does not beat 2011 Djokovic so that excludes him by process of elimination. So between 2000 Safin and 2011 Djokovic I am going with a 5 setter with the slight edge to Safin.

Fed was taken to 5 sets in hurricane conditions. But fair enough.

 

[TheAssassin]

Peak Marat against either one of those two guys? Tennis wins for sure.

 

[ibbi]

I think that Marat at his unperturbed best could feed on Nadal the way Djokovic does given how comfortable he is off the backhand wing, and the added height he has that will ensure the higher bounce doesn't bother him so much.

The thing he doesn't have is the god tier level of defending that Novak has that wore Rafa down in 2011, so if he doesn't immediately blow Nadal away in a couple of shots is he going to be able to/will he be bothered to hang in those long rallies? Hothead that he is I'm going to guess not.

I think it'd potentially be an all out classic, but if he wails on Rafa's serve the way he did on the friggin' Sampras serve it would be hard to look past him.

Against Novak it's tougher to call, with once again the question coming down to whether or not he's going to be able to mentally handle the human wall on the other side of the net. Add on the fact that Safin had a pretty shocking first serve percentage, you know Novak would be all over that with his return. Would probably give him the edge.

All in all I love Safin, but he made hard work of his first few rounds, far harder than Novak and Rafa ever had it in their respective runs, and it wasn't exactly against imperious opposition every step of the way. Even against Martin in the semi he was pretty shaky on serve and got broken a bunch of times. The level in the final I think masks a lot of his issues.

 

[Sport]

2000 Safin would defeat 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 Federer.

But 2000 Safin would have lost to 2010, 2013 and 2017 Nadal, as well as 2011 and 2015 Djokovic.

 

[Shaolin]

2000 USO Safin is a beast that destroys any opponent you put in front of it.

 

[Pheasant]

Safin at the 2000 USO was at the best level that I've ever seen on the hard courts. Anybody shutting down Pete's bomb serves, including his 120 mph 2nd serves is going to get my vote.

Safin also played this level at the 2005 AO semi and he took out Peak Fed in 5 sets. Safin was hitting serves up to 137 mph in that match. And that wasn't even the strongest part of his game.

And enough about the trashing of Federer. As far as 2004 Fed goes, he played in conditions in which the winds were gusting up to 5 mph against Agassi. McEnroe said before the match started that Agassi was a great wind player and that this match would likely be surprisingly competitive. And he was right. Everybody knows that the wind is an equalizer. Fed met Agassi 4 months later in the AO quarters. Agassi was the defending champ there and had won 3 out of the last 4 AO titles that he played in. This was Agassi's best slam event. But Fed destroyed him in straight sets. Another example of the wind messing up a player was when Djokovic played Ferrer in the USO semis in 2012. I watched that match too. Djokovic was lost in the wind. As a matter of fact, Ferrer won the first set 6-2. Djoker was missing routine shots and didn't even look like the same player. Luckily, the rain came in and forced the match to be suspended to the next day. Once the conditions were normal, Djokovic absolutely destroyed Ferrer, just like everybody expected him to. To Djoker's defense, I think that his match being pushed to Sunday against Ferrer costed him the 2012 USO title. He didn't get any days of rest and I think that worked to Murray's advantage. But either way, Murray played great. That match was an incredible match and to me, is very underrated.

Anyway, Safin takes this one. Sampras was stunned after the 2000 USO final. He said that he tried everything with his serves, but Safin returned everything, including body serves. Anybody that makes Sampras scratch his head by returning his 1st serves is going to get my vote. And Sampras had only dropped 1 set en route to the final. Sampras was in great form.

 

[abmk]

2004 Fed was taken to 5 sets by 34 year old Agassi but he defeats 2000 Safin in 4 sets? This is a man who dismantled Sampras who didn't play badly as compared to that 2001 final. 2004 Fed is really overrated on here because he double bageled Hewitt who really was not that good in the final and Federer himself did not have the numbers as clean as Safin's. Safin hit 36 winners and 12 unforced errors, which is crazy, in that final against a tougher opponent and never got broken. Hewitt only hit 12 winners in the 2004 final compared to 28 from Sampras in 2000, and Sampras forced more errors. 2000 Safin was a beast. 2010 Nadal does not beat 2011 Djokovic so that excludes him by process of elimination. So between 2000 Safin and 2011 Djokovic I am going with a 5 setter with the slight edge to Safin.

How on Earth can fed have numbers as clean as Safin's ? He was facing a baseliner in Hewitt as compared to an SnVer in Sampras that Safin faced.

When you are facing a net rusher/SnVer , your chances for UEs go down significantly.

As far as Agassi match is concerned , Federer was up 2 sets to one.
On the 2nd day, the hurricane like conditions made it a coin flip. Agassi won the 4th and fed the 5th.

Also Federer played clearly better in the SF and even better in the F.

If you are going to bring up the QF form instead of talking about final form for Federer, then I'll point out that Safin went 5 sets each vs Pozzi (who ?) . In 2R, 5 sets vs Grosjean in 3R(5th set TB) and didn't have it easy in the QF vs Kiefer either (competitive 4-setter)

I'm not saying Federer necessarily defeats Safin in 4 sets (I see it being 4 tight sets or a 5 setter in favour of Federer), but just pointing out flaws/inconsistencies in your logic/posts.

 

[metsman]

impossible to say. Safin put on amazing performances against serve and volleyers in the SF/F (obviously the final was quite a bit better) so it is hard to say how he'd do against a more defensive baseliner. He did destroy Ferrero and beat a very well playing Kiefer who is dangerous but those guys, especially Ferrero in his first HC slam, obviously aren't at the level of Djokovic/Nadal. It really sucks we never got to see Safin 2.0 at the USO, the best we have is that 04 Madrid/Paris/TMC form on fast HC.

As always, the court surface will make a huge difference. As will Safin's serve. His serve was more inconsistent in those days especially in the matches against Kiefer and Martin. He served like a beast in the final though.

 

[MeatTornado]

Safin hit 36 winners and 12 unforced errors, which is crazy, in that final against a tougher opponent and never got broken. Hewitt only hit 12 winners in the 2004 final compared to 28 from Sampras in 2000, and Sampras forced more errors. 2000 Safin was a beast. 2010 Nadal does not beat 2011 Djokovic so that excludes him by process of elimination. So between 2000 Safin and 2011 Djokovic I am going with a 5 setter with the slight edge to Safin.

Well no duh Safin hit more winners against a net-rushing Sampras than Hewitt could against a baselining Federer with his peak defensive speed.

Numbers never lie, but they require context.

 

[MeatTornado]

delete

 

[buscemi]

impossible to say. Safin put on amazing performances against serve and volleyers in the SF/F (obviously the final was quite a bit better) so it is hard to say how he'd do against a more defensive baseliner. He did destroy Ferrero and beat a very well playing Kiefer who is dangerous but those guys, especially Ferrero in his first HC slam, obviously aren't at the level of Djokovic/Nadal. It really sucks we never got to see Safin 2.0 at the USO, the best we have is that 04 Madrid/Paris/TMC form on fast HC.

As always, the court surface will make a huge difference. As will Safin's serve. His serve was more inconsistent in those days especially in the matches against Kiefer and Martin. He served like a beast in the final though.

Agreed. The serve and volley opponents Safin played in the SF/F make this comparison really difficult. I just wanted to point out that this wasn't Ferrero's first HC Major. He lost to Rusedski in four sets in the 1st round of the 1999 U.S. Open and lost to El Aynaoui in five sets in the 3rd round of the 2000 Australian Open.

 

[NoleFam]

Well no duh Safin hit more winners against a net-rushing Sampras than Hewitt could against a baselining Federer with his peak defensive speed.

Numbers never lie, but they require context.

It's not just that Safin hit more winners against a net rushing opponent. He did it off 120+ mph serves and in baseline rallies. There was power coming from everywhere. Hewitt hitting 12 winners and 23 unforced errors over 3 sets is not a good effort, and neither is hitting 1 ace and 5 double faults and getting broken 7 times. Which ever way you cut it, it's not a good performance. Every opponent Federer faced in that tournament hit more winners than Hewitt did against baselining Federer with his peak defensive speed.

 

[NoleFam]

How on Earth can fed have numbers as clean as Safin's ? He was facing a baseliner in Hewitt as compared to an SnVer in Sampras that Safin faced.

When you are facing a net rusher/SnVer , your chances for UEs go down significantly.

True enough and this does decrease his UE count somewhat but he still was mostly impenetrable from the backcourt in baseline rallies as well.

As far as Agassi match is concerned , Federer was up 2 sets to one.
On the 2nd day, the hurricane like conditions made it a coin flip. Agassi won the 4th and fed the 5th.

Also Federer played clearly better in the SF and even better in the F.

Federer is a great wind player himself but an Agassi playing well gives him all sorts of problems and did so historically. 2000 Safin was basically a 14 year younger and bigger Agassi with stronger legs, and a bigger serve. So it's basically Agassi on steroids, not literally of course.

If you are going to bring up the QF form instead of talking about final form for Federer, then I'll point out that Safin went 5 sets each vs Pozzi (who ?) . In 2R, 5 sets vs Grosjean in 3R(5th set TB) and didn't have it easy in the QF vs Kiefer either (competitive 4-setter)

The struggle against Pozzi is baffling but not the match against Grosjean. Grosjean would be top 5 the next year, make the SF of two Slams and win a Masters title. He was no pushover and a tough baseliner. I'm speaking about the second week when Safin took his game to a new level and lost one set over 4 matches. There is a big difference between the QF and the 2nd or 3rd round which is before your game is firing on all cylinders.

I'm not saying Federer necessarily defeats Safin in 4 sets (I see it being 4 tight sets or a 5 setter in favour of Federer), but just pointing out flaws/inconsistencies in your logic/posts.

Of course you do. You pick peak Federer to win 99% of the time and in 4 sets no less. Mythical peak Federer can never can be beaten on TTW so no surprise there.

 

[NatF]

It's not just that Safin hit more winners against a net rushing opponent. He did it off 120+ mph serves and in baseline rallies. There was power coming from everywhere. Hewitt hitting 12 winners and 23 unforced errors over 3 sets is not a good effort, and neither is hitting 1 ace and 5 double faults and getting broken 7 times. Which ever way you cut it, it's not a good performance. Every opponent Federer faced in that tournament hit more winners than Hewitt did against baselining Federer with his peak defensive speed.

Sometimes an opponent prevents you from hitting winners by beating you to the punch. Hewitt's biggest problem was a couple of bad doubles to get broken, the first two times he got broken he did very little wrong - his play dropped after that and he started making errors on some easier balls before pulling it together in the second. It was a subpar performance but a lot of that is down to Federer. I don't think many players would render Hewitt that ineffective and totally throw him off his game - Safin from 2000 is someone who could do that.

 

[NoleFam]

Sometimes an opponent prevents you from hitting winners by beating you to the punch. Hewitt's biggest problem was a couple of bad doubles to get broken, the first two times he got broken he did very little wrong - his play dropped after that and he started making errors on some easier balls before pulling it together in the second. It was a subpar performance but a lot of that is down to Federer. I don't think many players would render Hewitt that ineffective and totally throw him off his game - Safin from 2000 is someone who could do that.

Sometimes a player has a bad day but when you get double bageled in a Slam final, it has more to do with you than your opponent. Sure he may beat the crap out of you if he is on and redlining but 6-0 6-0 is just pathetic. You can't hold your serve once in 2 sets in a Slam final? No excuse for that and also no excuse for those subpar numbers and only hitting 12 winners. Even Santoro hit more winners than that. Sure Federer played very well but his performance is overrated on here because of that scoreline which was in part to an opponent who was listless and erratic.

 

[NatF]

Sometimes a player has a bad day but when you get double bageled in a Slam final, it has more to do with you than your opponent. Sure he may beat the crap out of you if he is on and redlining but 6-0 6-0 is just pathetic. You can't hold your serve once in 2 sets in a Slam final? No excuse for that and also no excuse for those subpar numbers and only hitting 12 winners. Even Santoro hit more winners than that. Sure Federer played very well but his performance is overrated on here because of that scoreline which was in part to an opponent who was listless and erratic.

23 UE's isn't erratic IMO. Hewitt was basically totally ineffective and definitely below par but I wouldn't call him erratic. I think it was mostly Federer shellshocking Hewitt and playing incredible tennis that was the cause of the double bagel but fair enough.

 

[abmk]

True enough and this does decrease his UE count somewhat but he still was mostly impenetrable from the backcourt in baseline rallies as well..

not really, Sampras was holding ok enough in the baseline rallies vs Safin. he should've stayed back more to make the match competitive.

Federer is a great wind player himself but an Agassi playing well gives him all sorts of problems and did so historically. 2000 Safin was basically a 14 year younger and bigger Agassi with stronger legs, and a bigger serve. So it's basically Agassi on steroids, not literally of course.

Federer played well enough in the wind, but Agassi was more experienced at playing in those conditions.
Agassi playing well gives him all sorts of problems ? really ?
no more than it gives anyone else.

In any case, what I said stands. Federer's level was clearly better in the SF and even more so in the final than in the QF.

The struggle against Pozzi is baffling but not the match against Grosjean. Grosjean would be top 5 the next year, make the SF of two Slams and win a Masters title. He was no pushover and a tough baseliner. I'm speaking about the second week when Safin took his game to a new level and lost one set over 4 matches. There is a big difference between the QF and the 2nd or 3rd round which is before your game is firing on all cylinders.

Safin raised his level from 1st week, but still didn't play "great" vs either Kiefer or Martin.

Didn't say Grosjean was a pushover, but considering you were on about Federer going 5 sets vs Agassi, of course the point about Pozzi and even Grosjean is going to be brought up ? what do you expect.

Of course you do. You pick peak Federer to win 99% of the time and in 4 sets no less. Mythical peak Federer can never can be beaten on TTW so no surprise there.

load of tired old bullcr*p . we're talking about best performance of federer here at the USO IMO. so hell yeah, I'd pick him.

 

[NoleFam]

23 UE's isn't erratic IMO. Hewitt was basically totally ineffective and definitely below par but I wouldn't call him erratic. I think it was mostly Federer shellshocking Hewitt and playing incredible tennis that was the cause of the double bagel but fair enough.

Well you just said he was spaying errors after getting broken which is pretty much erratic and did have double the errors than winners, which is always a red flag if you are measuring someone's performance. Federer didn't just shellshock him, he shallacked him but Hewitt could have played a lot better in my view. Fair enough though.

 

[abmk]

Sometimes a player has a bad day but when you get double bageled in a Slam final, it has more to do with you than your opponent. Sure he may beat the crap out of you if he is on and redlining but 6-0 6-0 is just pathetic. You can't hold your serve once in 2 sets in a Slam final? No excuse for that and also no excuse for those subpar numbers and only hitting 12 winners. Even Santoro hit more winners than that. Sure Federer played very well but his performance is overrated on here because of that scoreline which was in part to an opponent who was listless and erratic.

Hewitt hit 23 UEs out of 164 points total = 14.2% of the points. that's not erratic/high. His problem was not being able to be aggressive enough and below par serving in the 1st set.

Also Hewitt forced 26 errors from FEderer.

So total of 38 Winners+errors forced to 23 UEs.

A below par performance on USO HC, but not as bad as you were making it to be be just looking at 12 W to 23 UEs.

 

[NoleFam]

not really, Sampras was holding ok enough in the baseline rallies vs Safin. he should've stayed back more to make the match competitive.

I don't think Sampras won one point that went over 10 shots and only won 2 in the 7-9 shot range. He had no choice but to come in but got a barrage of missiles going past him when he did.

Federer played well enough in the wind, but Agassi was more experienced at playing in those conditions.
Agassi playing well gives him all sorts of problems ? really ?
no more than it gives anyone else.

Ok we will give Federer the benefit of the doubt regarding the conditions but you are going to pretend that Agassi firing on all cylinders did not give Federer all kinds of problems? Agassi was 33 and half before Federer beat him and Agassi at 31 beat him really badly at the 2001 USO. It wasn't until Agassi really slowed down that Federer got the edge.

load of tired old bullcr*p . we're talking about best performance of federer here at the USO IMO. so hell yeah, I'd pick him.

A load of bullcr*p? Really? When is the last time you have picked an opponent to beat "peak" Federer on hardcourt? He's not unbeatable ya know. Put 2000 Safin in that final and then let's still see if you still think that would be Federer's best performance at the USO.

 

[NoleFam]

Hewitt hit 23 UEs out of 164 points total = 14.2% of the points. that's not erratic/high. His problem was not being able to be aggressive enough and below par serving in the 1st set.

Also Hewitt forced 26 errors from FEderer.

So total of 38 Winners+errors forced to 23 UEs.

A below par performance on USO HC, but not as bad as you were making it to be be just looking at 12 W to 23 UEs.

Of course he wasn't aggressive enough which is why I said listless and I'm aware of his forced error count but it is still every bit as bad as I'm making it out to be. No question about it.

 

[mike danny]

I don't think Sampras won one point that went over 10 shots and only won 2 in the 7-9 shot range. He had no choice but to come in but got a barrage of missiles going past him when he did.

Ok we will give Federer the benefit of the doubt regarding the conditions but you are going to pretend that Agassi firing on all cylinders did not give Federer all kinds of problems? Agassi was 33 and half before Federer beat him and Agassi at 31 beat him really badly at the 2001 USO. It wasn't until Agassi really slowed down that Federer got the edge.

A load of bullcr*p? Really? When is the last time you have picked an opponent to beat "peak" Federer on hardcourt? He's not unbeatable ya know. Put 2000 Safin in that final and then let's still see if you still think that would be Federer's best performance at the USO.

Really? Using 2001 Fed as an argument?

 

[NatF]

Well you just said he was spaying errors after getting broken which is pretty much erratic and did have double the errors than winners, which is always a red flag if you are measuring someone's performance. Federer didn't just shellshock him, he shallacked him but Hewitt could have played a lot better in my view. Fair enough though.

His serve was erratic overall (but improved after the first) but his ground game wasn't. He basically played a couple of bad games at the first set and then played a pretty decent second set, the third set was definitely flat from Hewitt but not terrible. I think if you put a lot of different players in Hewitt's position you'd be surprised how easily they'd get beaten. I do think Safin could challenge that Federer (especially with the second set dip) but no player takes the first set from Federer IMO.

I'm curious about your view of Murray in 2011 AO final?

 

[metsman]

I don't think Sampras won one point that went over 10 shots and only won 2 in the 7-9 shot range. He had no choice but to come in but got a barrage of missiles going past him when he did.

Ok we will give Federer the benefit of the doubt regarding the conditions but you are going to pretend that Agassi firing on all cylinders did not give Federer all kinds of problems? Agassi was 33 and half before Federer beat him and Agassi at 31 beat him really badly at the 2001 USO. It wasn't until Agassi really slowed down that Federer got the edge.

A load of bullcr*p? Really? When is the last time you have picked an opponent to beat "peak" Federer on hardcourt? He's not unbeatable ya know. Put 2000 Safin in that final and then let's still see if you still think that would be Federer's best performance at the USO.

2001 USO? That's just trolling, the gap between Agassi's 01/02 HC form and 03/04 HC form is much smaller than Federer's and you know it. Agassi troubled Fed about as much as you'd expect for a player of that caliber, it wasn't like Federer had some particularly bad matchup against him.

Anyways, peak Fed is not invincible on HC, but some may think he has the best peak level, certainly on quicker ones, therefore in a hypothetical match you favor him because favoring someone else would contradict what you believe. Could he lose? Yes. Would you expect him to? Well, if you think he has the best peak level on HC, no you wouldn't.

 

[NoleFam]

Really? Using 2001 Fed as an argument?

You guys are way too sensitive. LOL.

 

[NoleFam]

His serve was erratic overall (but improved after the first) but his ground game wasn't. He basically played a couple of bad games at the first set and then played a pretty decent second set, the third set was definitely flat from Hewitt but not terrible. I think if you put a lot of different players in Hewitt's position you'd be surprised how easily they'd get beaten. I do think Safin could challenge that Federer (especially with the second set dip) but no player takes the first set from Federer IMO.

I'm curious about your view of Murray in 2011 AO final?

Well my spectrum of view is hardly ever going to match the views of most of the Federer fanbase so we will just go around in circles on this. We all are biased in our ways, some more than others, but I know how much you value that match so I won't turn the screws too much. We have disagreed on this one before I think but it's all good.

 

[NatF]

You guys are way too sensitive. LOL.

In that case how can you be sure Djokovic would even take a set against Safin considering AO 2005 and Wimbledon 2008?

 

[NatF]

Well my spectrum of view is hardly ever going to match the views of most of the Federer fanbase so we will just go around in circles on this. We all are biased in our ways, some more than others, but I know how much you value that match so I won't turn the screws too much. We have disagreed on this one before I think but it's all good.

I hope you were talking about yourself there Turn the screws as much as you like man, I'm just there are some 'overrated' Djokovic matches could discuss as well

 

[mike danny]

You guys are way too sensitive. LOL.

That's like me using 2006 Djokovic as an argument to prove Ancic's superiority on grass

 

[NoleFam]

2001 USO? That's just trolling, the gap between Agassi's 01/02 HC form and 03/04 HC form is much smaller than Federer's and you know it. Agassi troubled Fed about as much as you'd expect for a player of that caliber, it wasn't like Federer had some particularly bad matchup against him.

Anyways, peak Fed is not invincible on HC, but some may think he has the best peak level, certainly on quicker ones, therefore in a hypothetical match you favor him because favoring someone else would contradict what you believe. Could he lose? Yes. Would you expect him to? Well, if you think he has the best peak level on HC, no you wouldn't.

How is it trolling when it's true? You're just too sensitive about it. He did trouble Federer early on when Federer had more success against Sampras and other players. He beat him again at 32 in the Miami final and Federer has 11 year advantage on him. I don't understand why stuff like this gets you guys so riled up especially when the age difference comes up so often when it's argued in your favor.

 

[mike danny]

How is it trolling when it's true? You're just too sensitive about it. He did trouble Federer early on when Federer had more success against Sampras and other players. He beat him again at 32 in the Miami final and Federer has 11 year advantage on him. I don't understand why stuff like this gets you guys so riled up especially when the age difference comes up so often hen it's argued in your favor.

Back then a lot of guys troubled him, not just Agassi. Hewitt, Nalbandian for example. Agassi was just one of many players Fed had trouble with before he got it all together.

 

[NoleFam]

In that case how can you be sure Djokovic would even take a set against Safin considering AO 2005 and Wimbledon 2008?

I actually gave Safin the edge in 5. I know my fave is not invincible unlike you guys. I wouldn't surprised if Djokovic pulled out the win though.

 

[NoleFam]

That's like me using 2006 Djokovic as an argument to prove Ancic's superiority on grass

2006 Djokovic was not beating Sampras at Wimbledon and wasn't top 15 in the world.

 

[NatF]

I actually gave Safin the edge in 5. I know my fave is not invincible unlike you guys. I wouldn't surprised if Djokovic pulled out the win though.

Well Djokovic is anything but invincible at the USO man

I'm sure you'd back him over anyone else at the AO though right?

 

[NoleFam]

I hope you were talking about yourself there Turn the screws as much as you like man, I'm just there are some 'overrated' Djokovic matches could discuss as well

I'm sure there are. My fanbase is not immune to overrating and inflating matches that make our player look like a god although you guys are an entirely different level. LOL.

 

[NatF]

I'm sure there are. My fanbase is not immune to overrating and inflating matches that make our player look like a god although you guys are an entirely different level. LOL.

We're actually being accurate though

 

[abmk]

I don't think Sampras won one point that went over 10 shots and only won 2 in the 7-9 shot range. He had no choice but to come in but got a barrage of missiles going past him when he did.

eh what ?
Do you even remember the match properly or can you even analyse properly?

Check the stats properly :

7 to 9 shots : Sampras won 5 , Safin won 7
10+ shots : Sampras won 4, Safin won 6

4-6 shots : Sampras won 18,17

so 4+ shots : Sampras won 27, Safin won 30

Biggest difference was in the 1-3 shots : Sampras : 43, Safin : 59

http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20000910-M-US_Open-F-Pete_Sampras-Marat_Safin.html

Ok we will give Federer the benefit of the doubt regarding the conditions but you are going to pretend that Agassi firing on all cylinders did not give Federer all kinds of problems? Agassi was 33 and half before Federer beat him and Agassi at 31 beat him really badly at the 2001 USO. It wasn't until Agassi really slowed down that Federer got the edge.

no, not all kinds of problems. He gave as much of a problem as you'd expect.

you are bringing in 2001 USO ? really ? LOL. that was pre-prime federer.

Agassi in 2003-05 declined far less from 2001 than federer improved from there on.

Once federer won his 1st slam, he was 8-0 vs Agassi, 4 of them being convincing wins (YEC 03 final, AO 2005 QF, Dubai 05 SF, Miami 2005 SF) and 4 of the matches being competitive (YEC 2003 RR, IW 2004, USO 04, USO 05)
including quite a few stretches where Agassi was playing well.

A load of bullcr*p? Really? When is the last time you have picked an opponent to beat "peak" Federer on hardcourt? He's not unbeatable ya know. Put 2000 Safin in that final and then let's still see if you still think that would be Federer's best performance at the USO.

what metsman said here :

Anyways, peak Fed is not invincible on HC, but some may think he has the best peak level, certainly on quicker ones, therefore in a hypothetical match you favor him because favoring someone else would contradict what you believe. Could he lose? Yes. Would you expect him to? Well, if you think he has the best peak level on HC, no you wouldn't.

plus which version of "peak" Federer are we talking about ? on which court ?
AO 2006 - I'd back peak Agassi/Djokovic/Nadal to beat that version of Federer for instance
Miami - I'd definitely favour Djokovic over him.

 

[NoleFam]

Well Djokovic is anything but invincible at the USO man

I'm sure you'd back him over anyone else at the AO though right?

Of course. He's 2-5 in finals there so I'm not naive.

Well that's a bit different because of Djokovic's dominance there, as well as his dominance on that type of court (winning 4 Sunshine Doubles in his career and 3 in a row).

 

[abmk]

Back then a lot of guys troubled him, not just Agassi. Hewitt, Nalbandian for example. Agassi was just one of many players Fed had trouble with before he got it all together.

add Henman as well.

 

[abmk]

Well that's a bit different because of Djokovic's dominance there, as well as his dominance on that type of court (winning 4 Sunshine Doubles in his career and 3 in a row).

how on earth is that a bit different ?
Federer was even more dominant (not by much though) at the USO from 2004-09 than Djokovic was at the AO from 2011-2016.

-------------------

as far as the Sunshine doubles part go, they're well after the AO and tbh, Miami doesn't play that close to AO.

Roddick for example has had considerably more success at Miami.
Federer has considerably less success/consistency at Miami.....

Edit : and what NatF said ...

 

[NoleFam]

We're actually being accurate though

In your eyes you are.

 

[NatF]

Of course. He's 2-5 in finals there so I'm not naive.

Well that's a bit different because of Djokovic's dominance there, as well as his dominance on that type of court (winning 4 Sunshine Doubles in his career and 3 in a row).

Oh it's different is it? And Federer's 5 straight at the USO and general dominance on HC at peak e.g. longest record win streak and 199-13 (94%) record in 4 years etc...don't mean much?