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

[NoleFam]

You also mentioned Federer's rivals at the USO and barely mentioned Agassi who was still capable of raising his game at the USO and neglected Djokovic entirely.

There's much less variance in Djokovic's level at the USO than there is for Federer at the AO

I did mention Agassi. I don't think I neglected Djokovic, at least that wasn't my intention. We saw them play at USo before Djokovic's peak but we didn't see Nadal. We also saw them play after Djokovic hit his peak and while he had passed his.

In your opinion there is but Djokovic has wins over him at the AO dating back 8 years so I would say variance isn't quite a good argument here.

 

[abmk]

The sets were very close. Three 7-6 sets, four 7-5 sets and one 6-4 set. He also was a lot of trouble in 2007 well before he was going to hit his stride.

Just like sets 1& 3 in AO 08 SF and pretty much all the sets in AO 11 SF were close ?

In the end, all of them were convincing wins for Federer & Djokovic respectively.

 

[BrokenGears]

the only mental midgetry from djokovic was in the 1st set of USO 07. stop BSing.
and federer won sets 1 and 4 in USO 08 very comfortably. 6-3 and 6-2 respectively.



you didn't even watch sh*t in that timeframe. so stop talking.
davy was not a top tier opponent at the USO for fed.
Hewitt and Roddick were.

Lmao Djokovic was up 4-1 in one of the sets or a break I forget.

Whatever u need to tell yourself. Guess Philly was an ATG as well right?

 

[NoleFam]

Andreev was clearly weaker than Blake in 06, Roddick about the same as Djokovic, Murray even worse than Davydenko. In 04, Agassi alone makes it tougher because that is an opponent that could have actually beaten 08 Fed whereas 04 Fed would still cruise to the title in 08.

Andreev was good enough to push him to 5 though. Blake had to settle for 4 sets and bagel in the process. Roddick the same as what Djokovic? 2008? Ok I can accept that. This is too much cherry picking and it's hypocritical because Agassi is 11 years older than him and frankly was nowhere near Federer's level when he was 34, even if he did play a relatively high level that day. You guys complain daily about the 6 year difference but Agassi is now used here as a benchmark?

 

[abmk]

Lmao Djokovic was up 4-1 in one of the sets or a break I forget.

he was a break up , but got broken back by federer ...IIRC, federer played a pretty good return to break back. getting broken back ! = mental midgetery.
unless you want to continue to be ignorant.

Whatever u need to tell yourself. Guess Philly was an ATG as well right?

never said that, but all hail the performances of Lord Muzziah vs Djokovic, like in the AO 11 final, where he hit an awesome 47 UEs in a small 3-set match !

 

[NoleFam]

Federer was 2 points away from winning the USO 09 final. it hardly looked over until it actually was. He'd beaten Soderling in the QF and Djokovic in the SF convincingly, playing some damn good tennis.

remove 2012 at the AO for djokovic and take the other 4 years he won (11,13,15,16) his competition is on same level as federer's at the USO from 2004-07.

We know all that but the fact is his domination was over after that match. He should have won that but that's beside the point.

Who in 2004-2007 played the level Wawrinka did in 2013 AO? I don't see it. Also, the competition and depth was higher in 2011 and 2013. Not a good comparison.

 

[BrokenGears]

he was a break up , but got broken back by federer ...IIRC, federer played a pretty good return to break back. getting broken back ! = mental midgetery.
unless you want to continue to be ignorant.



never said that, but all hail the performances of Lord Muzziah vs Djokovic, like in the AO 11 final, where he hit an awesome 47 UEs in a small 3-set match !

Lmao Murray is easily better than Hewitt and Roddick

 

[abmk]

We know all that but the fact is his domination was over after that match. He should have won that but that's beside the point.

yeah, so it was over after it.
it held for 40 matches win streak there (1 walkover in USO 04) --- from 2004 USO 1R to 2009 USO SF.

Who in 2004-2007 played the level Wawrinka did in 2013 AO? I don't see it. Also, the competition and depth was higher in 2011 and 2013. Not a good comparison.

no, Stan's was higher in AO 2013 than anyone fed played at USO from 04-07, but apart from that ?

About your other part, I'll say for instance that 2004, 05,07 had clearly better depth and competition than 2015, 2016.
2011 didn't have more depth than 2004-07, it was just more top-heavy ....
etc. etc.
but let just stick to respective AOs and USOs than talking about years ...which will lead to an entirely different tangent.

 

[NatF]

We know all that but the fact is his domination was over after that match. He should have won that but that's beside the point.

Who in 2004-2007 played the level Wawrinka did in 2013 AO? I don't see it. Also, the competition and depth was higher in 2011 and 2013. Not a good comparison.

Safin at the AO in 2005 played better than Wawrinka in 2013. We've all already conceded that no one at the USO played that well if that's what you're getting at.

Depth in 2013? Good year but not that good IMO, depends on your perspective though Djokovic had much tougher comp that year than Nadal. And 2011 was mostly very top top heavy several other years had more depth.

 

[NoleFam]

yeah, so it was over after it.
it held for 40 matches win streak there (1 walkover in USO 04) --- from 2004 USO 1R to 2009 USO SF.



no, Stan's was higher in AO 2013 than anyone fed played, but apart from that ?

About your other part, I'll say for instance that 2004, 05,07 had clearly better depth and competition than 2015, 2016.
2011 didn't have more depth than 2004-07, it was just more top-heavy ....
etc. etc.
but let just stick to respective AOs and USOs than talking about years ...which will lead to an entirely different tangent.

Fair enough.

 

[Pheasant]

It looks like this turned into a AO Djoker vs a USO Federer match. This is quite interesting. Fed had the unbeatable 5 straight USO titles in a row. However, Djoker won 5 AO titles in a 6 year span with 6 total AO titles.

Fed at the USO:
82-12, .872 overall
16-6, .727 vs top 10

Best 6 year run:
5 titles, 1 runner up
14-1 vs top 10
Notable Wins: 3 wins vs Young Djokovic, 1 win over Murray, 1 over Davydenko, 2 over Peak Hewitt, 1 over Old Agassi, 2 over Peak Roddick


Djoker at AO:

61-8, .884 overall
17-5, .772 vs top 10

Best 6 year runs:
15-1 vs top 10
Notable wins: 2 over Old Fed, although 2011 straight-set win of Fed was very impressive, 5 over Andy Murray, 1 over Peak Nadal, 1 over Peak Stan

If we swap opponents, Fed's biggest risk is Nadal and Djoker's biggest risk is Peak Roddick. The rest would likely be straight forward. Roddick always played Djoker quite tough. Of course, Nadal played Fed tough, even on hard courts.

The most impressive win was Djoker's straight set win over Federer in 2011. That is impressive. Granted, this Fed wasn't peak. But he was quite good. That's an impressive win over a legend. I have to give Djoker credit where credit is due.

5 straight is nothing to sneeze at for Fed. But Djoker was insane at the AO. I cannot decide here. More on this later.

 

[Devin]

Lmao Murray is easily better than Hewitt and Roddick

Not easily. Hewitt has a better FH and ability to use pace against the opponent. Hewitt was also mentally stronger. The difference in serve is closer than one may think, as Murray has a powderpuff second serve. Murray has the better backhand though. I would take Hewitt at AO Rebound Ace, IW, USO, and most fast hards/indoor tournaments.

Roddick had a better forehand before he adopted that pattycake shot and a clearly better serve. The guy wasn't a bad mover either. I would take Roddick at Wimbledon and USO clearly over Murray, and probably some other tournaments as well.

 

[BrokenGears]

Not easily. Hewitt has a better FH and ability to use pace against the opponent. Hewitt was also mentally stronger. The difference in serve is closer than one may think, as Murray has a powderpuff second serve. Murray has the better backhand though. I would take Hewitt at AO Rebound Ace, IW, USO, and most fast hards/indoor tournaments.

Roddick had a better forehand before he adopted that pattycake shot and a clearly better serve. The guy wasn't a bad mover either. I would take Roddick at Wimbledon and USO clearly over Murray, and probably some other tournaments as well.

Results speak for themselves

 

[NoleFam]

Safin at the AO in 2005 played better than Wawrinka in 2013. We've all already conceded that no one at the USO played that well if that's what you're getting at.

Depth in 2013? Good year but not that good IMO, depends on your perspective though Djokovic had much tougher comp that year than Nadal. And 2011 was mostly very top top heavy several other years had more depth.

But we are comparing AO to USO. That was a great effort at redirection. They're about the same in my eyes but that's off topic.

I guess so and Nadal had a pretty fortunate 2013 USO draw. That's nothing new though. What other years had more depth than 2011?

 

[abmk]

Lmao Murray is easily better than Hewitt and Roddick

not when he is putting up a sh*tty performance like AO 11 final or crumbles due to DJokovic's drama/theatrics in AO 15 (in the 3rd set) , or gets injury affected(blisters) (after set 2 in AO 13 final) or when he's put a so-so performance (AO 16 final)

only match where he played really well vs djoko at the AO was the 12 one.

 

[BrokenGears]

Stan and Murray have more slams than most of Federer’s competition back in 04-07 just saying

 

[BrokenGears]

not when he is putting up a sh*tty performance like AO 11 final or crumbles due to DJokovic's drama/theatrics in AO 15 (in the 3rd set) , or gets injury affected(blisters) (after set 2 in AO 13 final) or when he's put a so-so performance (AO 16 final)

only match where he played really well vs djoko at the AO was the 12 one.

Lmao Murray is to Djokovic like Roddick is to Federer

And btw Arod is more of midget vs Fed as well

 

[abmk]

Notable Wins: 3 wins vs Young Djokovic, 1 win over Murray, 1 over Davydenko, 2 over Peak Hewitt, 1 over Old Agassi, 2 over Peak Roddick

2 wins over Davydenko (06 and 07 semis)
2 over Agassi (04 QF and 05 final)

 

[NoleFam]

It looks like this turned into a AO Djoker vs a USO Federer match. This is quite interesting. Fed had the unbeatable 5 straight USO titles in a row. However, Djoker won 5 AO titles in a 6 year span with 6 total AO titles.

Fed at the USO:
82-12, .872 overall
16-6, .727 vs top 10

Best 6 year run:
5 titles, 1 runner up
14-1 vs top 10
Notable Wins: 3 wins vs Young Djokovic, 1 win over Murray, 1 over Davydenko, 2 over Peak Hewitt, 1 over Old Agassi, 2 over Peak Roddick


Djoker at AO:

61-8, .884 overall
17-5, .772 vs top 10

Best 6 year runs:
15-1 vs top 10
Notable wins: 2 over Old Fed, although 2011 straight-set win of Fed was very impressive, 5 over Andy Murray, 1 over Peak Nadal, 1 over Peak Stan

If we swap opponents, Fed's biggest risk is Nadal and Djoker's biggest risk is Peak Roddick. The rest would likely be straight forward. Roddick always played Djoker quite tough. Of course, Nadal played Fed tough, even on hard courts.

The most impressive win was Djoker's straight set win over Federer in 2011. That is impressive. Granted, this Fed wasn't peak. But he was quite good. That's an impressive win over a legend. I have to give Djoker credit where credit is due.

5 straight is nothing to sneeze at for Fed. But Djoker was insane at the AO. I cannot decide here. More on this later.

2 wins over peak Wawrinka, 2013 and 2015. (Djokovic)

 

[NatF]

not when he is putting up a sh*tty performance like AO 11 final or crumbles due to DJokovic's drama/theatrics in AO 15 (in the 3rd set) , or gets injury affected(blisters) (after set 2 in AO 13 final) or when he's put a so-so performance (AO 16 final)

only match where he played really well vs djoko at the AO was the 12 one.

Well 2009 had more depth and probably 2012, I'd say 2005 had more depth even if the competition was weaker overall due to the top heavyness of 2011. I'd say probably 2004 and 2007 did as well - I think those years had a deeper pool of dangerous players beneath the top few.

 

[NatF]

Stan and Murray have more slams than most of Federer’s competition back in 04-07 just saying

Because Djokovic isn't as good as Federer at Wimbledon and the USO...

 

[metsman]

Andreev was good enough to push him to 5 though. Blake had to settle for 4 sets and bagel in the process. Roddick the same as what Djokovic? 2008? Ok I can accept that. This is too much cherry picking and it's hypocritical because Agassi is 11 years older than him and frankly was nowhere near Federer's level when he was 34, even if he did play a relatively high level that day. You guys complain daily about the 6 year difference but Agassi is now used here as a benchmark?

Federer of the 06 QF was much better than Federer of the 08 R16. It's ludicrous to think that Andreev would get anywhere close to winning 2 sets vs 06 Fed, and Blake is just a significantly better player when at his best who had a rather unfortunate career arc, or would have been regarded more highly. Kiefer in 05 was probably a better opponent than Andreev and he couldn't win 2 despite facing a worse version of Fed than 06, although if not for that miraculous Fed BH pass on break point in the third, maybe he might have. But Kiefer as a player is a tier above Andreev, who is just a journeyman who's never sniffed the top 10. He is capable of playing some good tennis with that big FH and at times dangerous serve, as he did in that match, but it needs some setup time and he's usually better on slower surfaces as a result, which makes that USO result even more astounding (as well as watching the match and noting Federer was clearly below par, although Andreev did play well)

04 Agassi is easily on 14/15 Fed's level on HC and played better at AO/USO than 14 or 15 Federer. And more able to bring his best in the slams vs peak opponents due to lesser degradation in ball striking/baseline play, and as a result less prone to huge lapses in play when the serve was off. Even besides that, 04 Agassi was past his prime sure, but of course it doesn't need to be mentioned that there's a huge difference between the miles on a 34 year old Agassi vs a 34 year old Federer and that a 34 year old Agassi was much closer to his prime, closer to a 2011 Federer than an equivalent aged 2015 Federer, especially in slams.

 

[FHtennisman]

Federer of the 06 QF was much better than Federer of the 08 R16. It's ludicrous to think that Andreev would get anywhere close to winning 2 sets vs 06 Fed, and Blake is just a significantly better player when at his best who had a rather unfortunate career arc, or would have been regarded more highly. Kiefer in 05 was probably a similar/better opponent than Andreev and he couldn't win 2 despite facing a worse version of Fed than 06, although if not for that miraculous Fed BH pass on break point in the third, maybe he might have.

04 Agassi is easily on 14/15 Fed's level on HC and played better at AO/USO than 14 or 15 Federer. And more able to bring his best in the slams vs peak opponents due to lesser degradation in ball striking/baseline play, and as a result less prone to huge lapses in play when the serve was off. Even besides that, 04 Agassi was past his peak sure, but of course it doesn't need to be mentioned that there's a huge difference between the miles on a 34 year old Agassi vs a 34 year old Federer and that a 34 year old Agassi was much closer to his prime, closer to a 2011 Federer than an equivalent aged 2015 Federer, especially in slams.

How do you think an 03-05 Agassi would've matched up with a prime Novak on HCs (2011-2016)?

 

[metsman]

How do you think an 03-05 Agassi would've matched up with a prime Novak on HCs (2011-2016)?

Matchup wise, novak gives him a nice rhythm to work with and doesn't play with a ton of variety/initiative which would be good for Agassi. Agassi also doesn't mind hitting a million balls as long as he can dictate, so while he wouldn't be able to hit through Novak that much because he's not as massive hitter as Stan (in terms of consistent power), he'd still be in control in a lot of rallies and not implode by pulling the trigger too early which is what Novak forces a lot of people to do. Against peak Novak, Agassi wouldn't get as many short balls and would be -put on the run a fair amount and his movement wouldn't hold up at the end of the day. However, if Murray and Nishikori (who is essentially a poverty version of Agassi) can beat Novak and Stan can push him hard/beat him at USO, Agassi sure as hell can beat those versions of Novak as well.

 

[FHtennisman]

Matchup wise, novak gives him a nice rhythm to work with and doesn't play with a ton of variety/initiative which would be good for Agassi. Ultimately, Agassi's movement wouldn't hold up against the best versions of Novak but if Murray and Nishikori (who is essentially a poverty version of Agassi) can beat Novak and Stan can push him hard/beat him at USO, Agassi sure as hell can beat those versions of Novak as well.

Yep agreed there. I also think he would push Novak considerably at AO too, maybe not win but definitely have tight sets.

 

[metsman]

Yep agreed there. I also think he would push Novak considerably at AO too, maybe not win but definitely have tight sets.

I edited the post a bit to talk about the matchup more.

03 Agassi was still great at the AO although he faced a bunch of jokers. Would definitely have his chances against 12-15 Novak there. 11 and 16 would be too much consistent depth and pressure from Novak. Think 03 Agassi would pull off a win and give him some tight battles against 12-15 Novak if they faced all 4 times, 04 Agassi no, but would still push him, he played some fantastic tennis in that event but Safin was just a beast and Agassi fell apart a bit in the 5th. Physically, I think he declined a bit after 03 Miami and those injuries hit, of course that process got expedited after the 04 USO.

 

[ADuck]

In your eyes you are.

You have the "wrong" opinion, and they have the "right" opinion though. "We're being accurate though" just means their brains can process information much more effectively than other people's according to themselves (including yours) so best accept that and shut up. They're infallible. It's best you stop disagreeing with them.

 

[FHtennisman]

I edited the post a bit to talk about the matchup more.

03 Agassi was still great at the AO although he faced a bunch of jokers. Would definitely have his chances against 12-15 Novak there. 11 and 16 would be too much consistent depth and pressure from Novak. Think 03 Agassi would pull off a win and give him some tight battles against 12-15 Novak if they faced all 4 times, 04 Agassi no, but would still push him. Physically, I think he declined a bit after 03 Miami and those injuries hit, of course that process got expedited after the 04 USO.

Yep, can definitely see Novak at his best exploiting Agassi's lateral movement.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Safin will be dusted.

 

[NatF]

You have the "wrong" opinion, and they have the "right" opinion though. "We're being accurate though" just means their brains can process information much more effectively than other people's according to themselves (including yours) so best accept that and shut up. They're infallible. It's best you stop disagreeing with them.

It's best if you buy a sense of humour and learn to take a joke

NoleFam is as sure of his opinions as anyone.

 

[NoleFam]

Federer of the 06 QF was much better than Federer of the 08 R16. It's ludicrous to think that Andreev would get anywhere close to winning 2 sets vs 06 Fed, and Blake is just a significantly better player when at his best who had a rather unfortunate career arc, or would have been regarded more highly. Kiefer in 05 was probably a better opponent than Andreev and he couldn't win 2 despite facing a worse version of Fed than 06, although if not for that miraculous Fed BH pass on break point in the third, maybe he might have. But Kiefer as a player is a tier above Andreev, who is just a journeyman who's never sniffed the top 10. He is capable of playing some good tennis with that big FH and at times dangerous serve, as he did in that match, but it needs some setup time and he's usually better on slower surfaces as a result, which makes that USO result even more astounding (as well as watching the match and noting Federer was clearly below par, although Andreev did play well)

04 Agassi is easily on 14/15 Fed's level on HC and played better at AO/USO than 14 or 15 Federer. And more able to bring his best in the slams vs peak opponents due to lesser degradation in ball striking/baseline play, and as a result less prone to huge lapses in play when the serve was off. Even besides that, 04 Agassi was past his prime sure, but of course it doesn't need to be mentioned that there's a huge difference between the miles on a 34 year old Agassi vs a 34 year old Federer and that a 34 year old Agassi was much closer to his prime, closer to a 2011 Federer than an equivalent aged 2015 Federer, especially in slams.

I feel like we're straying off topic here. The point was you said 2008 was the easiest of his USO victories when it wasn't really. We can go back and say what Federer in 2006 would have done in 2008 but I don't feel that is relevant. He had it easier in 2006 and 2004 than he did in 2008, based on sets lost and matches played. Also, Andreev played really well that day and took it to Federer and deserves credit for that.

I'm sorry man but any notion that 34 year old Agassi was on 2011 Federer's level just can't be taken seriously. Also, to suggest that Agassi was closer to his prime at 34 than Federer was at 34 is untrue. Agassi had serious back issues that began around that time and got worse, and what forced him to retire. Federer is running around the court at close to 37 with a Slam win this year. Also, there is no way that Agassi in 2005 USO played close to the level Federer did in 2015. Agassi should have lost to Blake if Blake wasn't so weak mentally and was taken to 5 sets 3 times in a row before the final. Federer didn't even drop serve until the final in 2015, so you can forget about sets. Only the 2004 AO you can say that he was better at that tournament than Federer was in 2014 and 2015. Ultimately though, Agassi hovered around #7 or #8 in the world and Federer was #2 and dominant at that age, being stopped only by Djokovic.

 

[NoleFam]

You have the "wrong" opinion, and they have the "right" opinion though. "We're being accurate though" just means their brains can process information much more effectively than other people's according to themselves (including yours) so best accept that and shut up. They're infallible. It's best you stop disagreeing with them.

NatF is not so bad. He's biased (LOL) but not too much where we can't have pretty good discussions. We're just mostly joking around.

 

[tennis_pro]

Safin will be dusted.

 

[abmk]

I'm sorry man but any notion that 34 year old Agassi was on 2011 Federer's level just can't be taken seriously. Also, to suggest that Agassi was closer to his prime at 34 than Federer was at 34 is untrue. Agassi had serious back issues that began around that time and got worse, and what forced him to retire. Federer is running around the court at close to 37 with a Slam win this year. Also, there is no way that Agassi in 2005 USO played close to the level Federer did in 2015. Agassi should have lost to Blake if Blake wasn't so weak mentally and was taken to 5 sets 3 times in a row before the final. Federer didn't even drop serve until the final in 2015, so you can forget about sets. Only the 2004 AO you can say that he was better at that tournament than Federer was in 2014 and 2015. Ultimately though, Agassi hovered around #7 or #8 in the world and Federer was #2 and dominant at that age, being stopped only by Djokovic.

pretty sure he was comparing 2004/05 Agassi to 2014/2015 Fed in HC slams as a whole.

2004 agassi played better in the fed USO match than fed did vs Djokovic in 15. Tournament wise,you could say fed was about same, at best a tad better better, but its tough to compare ........seeing as agassi met fed in the quarters.

Edit : Fed was broken twice by Kohlscreiber in USO 15.

2005 USO agassi > 2014 USO fed (who was down 2 sets to love to Monfils, had to save 2 MPs) and went down in straights to Cilic (an impressive Cilic no doubt)

2004 AO agassi (went down in a huge battle to Safin in 5 sets) > 2014 AO fed (who played a below par match vs Nadal)

2005 AO agassi (who played decent, but went down to fed in straights) > 2015 AO fed (who played a below par match and lost to Seppi in 3R)

 

[Druss]

I would give the edge to Safin over both Djokodal 2010/11. IMO there are not many versions since 1990 that could beat 2000 USO Safin, perhaps one or two versions of Federer, that's about it.

 

[metsman]

pretty sure he was comparing 2004/05 Agassi to 2014/2015 Fed in HC slams as a whole.

2004 agassi played better in the fed USO match than fed did vs Djokovic in 15. Tournament wise,you could say fed was about same, at best a tad better better, but its tough to compare ........seeing as agassi met fed in the quarters

2005 USO agassi > 2014 USO fed (who was down 2 sets to love to Monfils, had to save 2 MPs) and went down in straights to Cilic (an impressive Cilic no doubt)

2004 AO agassi (went down in a huge battle to Safin in 5 sets) > 2014 AO fed (who played a below par match vs Nadal)

2005 AO agassi (who played decent, but went down to fed in straights) > 2015 AO fed (who played a below par match and lost to Seppi in 3R)

In 2011, looking at performance in outdoor HC, they were basically at a similar level. Compare level in AO, IW, Miami, Toronto, Cincy, USO. 04/05 Agassi was better than 14/15 Fed in HC slams as you mentioned. Apparently he can't take that seriously though. Instead he'll hit me with the epic logic that 08 USO Fed had it tougher than 06 because Andreev took super sloppy Fed to 5 and Blake couldn't take the absolute best Fed 5 LMAO. Or that Fed was ranked #2 because he got a lot of points on grass while Agassi mostly played HC and had the misfortune of running into Fed in the QF at USO as a result, which is basically the whole difference in their rankings and as a result Fed was better on HC.

 

[ADuck]

It's best if you buy a sense of humour and learn to take a joke

NoleFam is as sure of his opinions as anyone.

I can take a joke. Can you though?

 

[metsman]

I can take a joke. Can you though?

This thread is a bit above your pay grade unfortunately. Stick to the weak era threads and the best avatar threads.

 

[NoleFam]

pretty sure he was comparing 2004/05 Agassi to 2014/2015 Fed in HC slams as a whole.

2004 agassi played better in the fed USO match than fed did vs Djokovic in 15. Tournament wise,you could say fed was about same, at best a tad better better, but its tough to compare ........seeing as agassi met fed in the quarters.

Edit : Fed was broken twice by Kohlscreiber in USO 15.

2005 USO agassi > 2014 USO fed (who was down 2 sets to love to Monfils, had to save 2 MPs) and went down in straights to Cilic (an impressive Cilic no doubt)

2004 AO agassi (went down in a huge battle to Safin in 5 sets) > 2014 AO fed (who played a below par match vs Nadal)

2005 AO agassi (who played decent, but went down to fed in straights) > 2015 AO fed (who played a below par match and lost to Seppi in 3R)

It still would be incorrect in my opinion. Federer has a Slam final, 2 SFs, 3 hardcourt Masters, 3 other hardcourt Masters finals, 2 WTF finals. Agassi had a Slam final, 1 SF, 2 QF, 1 Masters and 1 Masters final. Not really close.

I don't think Agassi played better in that 2004 match than Federer did in 2015 but I do think Federer played worse in that 2004 match than Djokovic did in the 2015 final for whatever reason. Maybe it was the wind or the crowd, or both but Federer was not quite top level there. He was up and down and almost went down 2 sets to 1 if I am remembering correctly.

They're about the same. Agassi 2005 was two sets to love down to Blake. Cilic was a monster and wasn't Federer's fault. Not much anyone can do against that level of play.

I already said 2004 AO Agassi is better than 2014, 2015 AO Federer.

 

[ADuck]

This thread is a bit above your pay grade unfortunately. Stick to the weak era threads and the best avatar threads.

Nice, mature post. On a side note, I actually don't remember posting on any weak era threads or best avatar threads.

 

[NoleFam]

In 2011, looking at performance in outdoor HC, they were basically at a similar level. Compare level in AO, IW, Miami, Toronto, Cincy, USO. 04/05 Agassi was better than 14/15 Fed in HC slams as you mentioned. Apparently he can't take that seriously though. Instead he'll hit me with the epic logic that 08 USO Fed had it tougher than 06 because Andreev took super sloppy Fed to 5 and Blake couldn't take the absolute best Fed 5 LMAO. Or that Fed was ranked #2 because he got a lot of points on grass while Agassi mostly played HC and had the misfortune of running into Fed in the QF at USO as a result, which is basically the whole difference in their rankings and as a result Fed was better on HC.

Speak to me directly bro. I am right here. I disagree with it and explained why which is hard to argue against when you look at their results and how dominant Federer was over the entire field at 34. It's also just not logical to make that comparison to 2011 Federer who was much quicker around the court and still very agile at 29/30.

 

[abmk]

It still would be incorrect in my opinion. Federer has a Slam final, 2 SFs, 3 hardcourt Masters, 3 other hardcourt Masters finals, 2 WTF finals. Agassi had a Slam final, 1 SF, 2 QF, 1 Masters and 1 Masters final. Not really close.

talking specifically about HC slams.

And even though Agassi only reached QF in USO 04, he was clearly better than fed in AO 14/USO 14 where fed reached the semis.

I don't think Agassi played better in that 2004 match than Federer did in 2015 but I do think Federer played worse in that 2004 match than Djokovic did in the 2015 final for whatever reason. Maybe it was the wind or the crowd, or both but Federer was not quite top level there. He was up and down and almost went down 2 sets to 1 if I am remembering correctly.

yeah, Agassi did play clearly better in USO 2004 QF than Federer in 2015 final (federer in the 15 final only played well in the middle 2 sets and after he went down 2 breaks down in the 4th set. 1st set was below par and he shouldn't have allowed himself to go down 2 breaks in the 4th set)

I don't think Federer played worse in the 2004 match than Djokovic in the 2015 final either.
yeah, he wasn't top level. but fed's top level at the USO is clearly better than djokovic's....so ...

Oh and Djokovic was down BP at 4 all in the 3rd set and federer missed an easy FH. Djokvoic was closer to going 2 sets to 1 down than Fed was. Federer didn't face a BP at 4-5 (held at deuce). then broke to make it 6-5 and then held to serve for the set.

They're about the same. Agassi 2005 was two sets to love down to Blake. Cilic was a monster and wasn't Federer's fault. Not much anyone can do against that level of play.

yes, you can hold and take it to a friggin' TB. put the doubts in the mind of the other player.
Federer was less sharp in the semi after the tiring 5-setter vs Monfils, which is why he couldn't do it. Cilic was playing really well, but you are crazy if you think federer couldn't have done clearly better.

Agassi was up against peak fed in the USO 2005 final and played him pretty well for 3 sets (sets 2 and 3, even more so). if fed in USO 2014 was equivalent, he sure as hell would've put up a considerably tougher fight vs Cilic --- a good enough fight to allow Cilic to most probably go on a streak of UEs/choke....

its a joke to equate those 2 levels frankly.
agassi in the USO 2005 final was considerably better than fed was in the 2014 USO semi.

also ....

Blake was playing clearly better vs Agassi than Monfils was against Federer.
Agassi played clearly better vs Blake than fed did vs Monfils.

 

[Max G.]

2000 Safin vs 2010 Nadal?

Depends when they played. If they played in 2000, then 2010 Nadal would be at a big disadvantage and would probably lose, since travel backwards in time has dizziness and difficulty focusing as side-effects. If they played in 2010, then 2000 Safin would be ten years out of practice and would probably lose.

 

[NoleFam]

talking specifically about HC slams.

He was talking about Masters as well. If it's hardcourt Slams only then that is more open to interpretation and believable.

yeah, Agassi did play clearly better in USO 2004 QF than Federer in 2015 final and I don't think it was that close either. (federer in the 15 final only played well in the middle 2 sets and after he went down 2 breaks down in the 4th set. 1st set was below par and he shouldn't have allowed himself to go down 2 breaks in the 4th set)

I don't think Federer played worse in the 2004 match than Djokovic in the 2015 final either.

I agree to disagree on this.

yes, you can hold and take it to a friggin' TB. put the doubts in the mind of the other player.
Blake was playing clearly better vs Agassi than Monfils was against Federer.
Agassi played clearly better vs Blake than fed did vs Monfils.

Agassi still should have got sent home because he was outplayed worse than Federer was. Blake mentally choked when he should have won that match with so many chances. Agassi was lucky to escape that.

Agassi was up against peak fed in the final and played him tough for 3 sets. if fed in USo 2014 was equivalent, he sure as hell would've put up a considerably tougher fight vs Cilic --- maybe enough for him to explode/feel nervous.

Cilic was just unplayable and was an opponent who was redlining and teeing off on everything. If 2005 Agassi had played him he would have gotten the same treatment, especially considering it took him 5 sets to get past Ginepri who was nowhere near that level.

 

[abmk]

He was talking about Masters as well. If it's hardcourt Slams only then that is more open to interpretation and believable.

Actually its pretty clear : 2004/2005 Agassi was better in HC slams as a whole than Federer in 2014/2015.
Federer was better outside of them. (healthier and less impacted by injuries in the non-slam events)

How much emphasis you give to both is upto you.

Agassi still should have got sent home because he was outplayed worse than Federer was. Blake mentally choked when he should have won that match with so many chances. Agassi was lucky to escape that.

IIRC, there was some choking from blake, but the match as a whole was pretty high quality , certainly clearly better than fed-monfils.

And Agassi's fightback was excellent.

monfils was also passive on 1 of the 2 MP chances he had IIRC.

Like I said, agassi in USO 2005 QF > fed in USO 2014 QF
blake in USo 2005 QF > monfils in USO 2014 QF

Cilic was just unplayable and was an opponent who was redlining and teeing off on everything. If 2005 Agassi had played him he would have gotten the same treatment, especially considering it took him 5 sets to get past Ginepri who was nowhere near that level.

not the Agassi who played in the final vs federer. which is what is more relevant here.
Cilic would've lost atleast one set, maybe even 2. Agassi broke federer who was serving well, at 76% for the match, thrice in those middle 2 sets, FFS.

P.S. I didn't see/haven't seen the ginepri match, but Agassi was atleast a bit below par there from what I know.

 

[NoleFam]

Actually its pretty clear : 2004/2005 Agassi was better in HC slams as a whole than Federer in 2014/2015.
Federer was better outside of them. (healthier and less impacted by injuries in the non-slam events)

How much emphasis you give to both is upto you.

The way I see it is 2004 AO Agassi > 2014, 2015 AO Federer & 2015 USO Federer > 2004, 2005 USO Agassi
2015 USO Federer did not lose serve and did not lose a set until the final so he trumps all in my opinion.

IIRC, there was some choking from blake, but the match as a whole was a pretty high quality , certainly clearly better than fed-monfils

It was a better match but still pretty much a choke from Blake and he couldn't serve it out when it was on his racket.

not the Agassi who played in the final vs federer. which is what is more relevant here.
Cilic would've lost atleast one set, maybe even 2. Agassi broke federer who was serving well, at 76% for the match, thrice in those middle 2 sets, FFS.

Agassi got taken to 5 sets by Malisse, Blake and Ginepri so he was hardly on some other world level in those rounds. Cilic would have loved his chances against that version of Agassi. Yes he played good in the final for a stretch but he could not maintain it either after being up 4-2 in the 3rd. An opponent as dangerous as Cilic was who was redlining and blasting everything would have been curtains for Agassi in my opinion.

 

[abmk]

The way I see it is 2004 AO Agassi > 2014, 2015 AO Federer & 2015 USO Federer > 2004, 2005 USO Agassi
2015 USO Federer did not lose serve and did not lose a set until the final so he trumps all in my opinion.

take the 4 of them in order of playing well :

even if you have :

2015 USO fed > 2004 USO agassi
2004 AO agassi > 2014 AO fed
2005 AO agassi > 2015 AO fed
and even with 2014 USO fed ~ 2005 agassi (which I don't think it should be at all)

agassi's still comes out clearly better.

don't ignore that agassi in 2005 AO was clearly better than fed in 2015 AO.

IMO, its 2015 USO fed ~ 2004 USO agassi (at best 2015 USO is slightly better)
2004 AO agassi >> 2014 AO fed
2005 AO agassi >> 2015 AO fed
2005 USO agassi > 2014 USO fed

 

[abmk]

Agassi got taken to 5 sets by Malisse, Blake and Ginepri so he was hardly on some other world level in those rounds. Cilic would have loved his chances against that version of Agassi. Yes he played good in the final for a stretch but he could not maintain it either after being up 4-2 in the 3rd. An opponent as dangerous as Cilic was who was redlining and blasting everything would have been curtains for Agassi in my opinion.

I've told this before to you - that its bull to say agassi's level dropped after 4-2 in the 3rd set. his level only dropped in the 4th set after losing the 3rd set.
Give some godamann credit to federer for breaking back and raising his level in the 3rd set.

the way agassi played in the QF/Final of the USO, he'd definitely have taken a set from Cilic IMO - something which federer didn't do.

 

[NoleFam]

take the 4 of them in order of playing well :

even if you have :

2015 USO fed > 2004 USO agassi
2004 AO agassi > 2014 AO fed
2005 AO agassi > 2015 AO fed
and even with 2014 USO fed ~ 2005 agassi (which I don't think it should be at all)

agassi's still comes out clearly better.

don't ignore that agassi in 2005 AO was clearly better than fed in 2015 AO.

IMO, its 2015 USO fed ~ 2004 USO agassi (at best 2015 USO is slightly better)
2004 AO agassi >> 2014 AO fed
2005 AO agassi >> 2015 AO fed
2005 USO agassi > 2014 USO fed

2015 AO Fed lost in the 3rd round. What is there to ignore?

2015 USO Fed hadn't lost serve or a set since the Wimbledon final but 2004 USO Agassi is on par with him? No dude.

The rest, fair enough although I see it differently.

 

[abmk]

It was a better match but still pretty much a choke from Blake and he couldn't serve it out when it was on his racket.

Game at 5-4 in the 5th set :

serve+fh winner from blake
fh return winner off the 1st serve from agassi
deep bh return off a body serve to force error from blake
agressive fh return off 2nd serve from agassi to force error from blake
one FH UE from blake trying to go FH DTL after a net chord.

yep, some choke that.

2:26:28