2005 a considerably better year than 2015 in men's tennis

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Your stats r shiz

Same guys reaching semis every slam means your era is the weakest, not strongest.

Look at 90s, how many same guys reached semis ? Who were the big 4 ?

Someone like Andy Murray makes the semis everytime and loses to the big 3 everytime, this gives a stupid illusion that he is better than Safin or Krajicek .... Some lunatics even say that Murray would have 10+ in other era..... LOL.....but then it is not true ..... Safin has beaten Federer at his best while Andy never could beat even an old federer properly, except that 1 win in 2013 which was in Fed's horrible year and that too in 5 long sets

Jeez ... You need 5 sets beat an old injured man, what is the use of getting to all these semis ??? Obv it means outside the top 4-5 players the rest the field is crappy
Yes Murray is a better player than Safin and Krajicek.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Better achiever, but with a lower peak level.

In GOAT debate Safin can create a greater dent on Fedalovic's resume than Murray who is quite null and void.
How many times did Safin reach this mythical peak? A couple of times?

I'd take a player who can play his best tennis consistently over someone who loses Slam finals to Thomas Johansson :oops:
 

Sunny014

Legend
Murray creates a dent on nobody's resume, he is that useless against his main rivals in Slams.

If Semis meant anything then Sampras and Murray would be same, but then just semis are nothing.

Murray is few leagues below Sampras....
 

Sunny014

Legend
How many times did Safin reach this mythical peak? A couple of times?

I'd take a player who can play his best tennis consistently over someone who loses Slam finals to Thomas Johansson :oops:

Take where?

If your life is on the line in a match against peak Federer on HCs then whom would you pick in this trial by combat ?

Peak Safin or Peak Murray ?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
How many times did Safin reach this mythical peak? A couple of times?

I'd take a player who can play his best tennis consistently over someone who loses Slam finals to Thomas Johansson :oops:

many times.
its why he has 2 slams, 2 more slam finals, slam semis at all slams, 5 masters, reached #1.

Djokonuts like you have no clue obviously.
Maybe thrashing the daylights out of Djokovic in Wim 08 will help, hmm?
 

Sunny014

Legend
Looking at how many mediocre players won Slams in 2000-04, I'd say no.

Which mediocre player won slams ?
Goran ?
Hewitt ?
Safin ?
Gaudio ?
Agassi ?

Each one of them produced world class performances to win, look at your Novak's resume if you wanna see mediocrity, the whole field that he has beaten to win slams after 2015 is the definition of mediocrity.

Game used to be so fast in the 00s and early 2010s .... I am sick of seeing slow baseliners engage in dumb rallies and 6 foot 5 tall next gen look clueless .....
 

Sunny014

Legend
“Whatever I tried, he had the answers,” Sampras said. “With his game, as big as he hits the ball, when he's on, he's very, very tough to beat.”

- Sampras's words after losing to peak Safin.

Did anyone with 10+ slams ever praise Murray like this after a grand slam final?
 

RS

Bionic Poster
All indicators indicate that Federer is the GOAT.

At his peak outside clay when he was full fit only Safin has beaten him and Safin is the same guy who has 2-0 H2H vs Marat, a more lethal version of Wawrinka who himself is 4-4 vs Novak in Slams, wawrinka is someone who is 0-17 to Federer overall.

So the question marks of Safin and Wawrinka are on Djokovic, not on Federer.
Federer has crushed Wawrinka and beaten Safin most of the time, Novak on the other hand 2 rivals with same style and very formidable for him.

Peak Federer would have beaten Peak Djokvic in 4 sets everytime, there won't be any clutch involved because matches wouldn't go 5 sets with tie breakers.
Very objective!
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
“Whatever I tried, he had the answers,” Sampras said. “With his game, as big as he hits the ball, when he's on, he's very, very tough to beat.”

- Sampras's words after losing to peak Safin.


Did anyone with 10+ slams ever praise Murray like this after a grand slam final?

Look, Safin could play at an amazing level, but he also played terrible very often, including Slam finals (vs Johansson for example). So Murray is a much safer choice.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I consider opponents players who skipped it too.

no, you are just twisting it now after I called you out.
the 2nd time.

How can you be a potential opponent if not in the tournament? Not possible at all.

Well that is unless you are in the world of shameless chutiya Lew.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster

Look, Safin could play at an amazing level, but he also played terrible very often, including Slam finals (vs Johansson for example). So Murray is a much safer choice.

LOL @ the mention of slam finals and Murray. Murray in USO 08 and AO 11 finals say hi.
 

RS

Bionic Poster

Sunny014

Legend

Look, Safin could play at an amazing level, but he also played terrible very often, including Slam finals (vs Johansson for example). So Murray is a much safer choice.

He certainly wouldn't have more than 3 slams if he were from 2000s.
Roger Federer when younger isn't letting him win even 1 slam and it took superhuman performance from Safin to take down Federer in 05 and Nadal ain't giving away French......

So good Lucky Andy.

As far as the 90s go, thats tricky, without playing him Agassi is assuming that Andy would be having 3 times the career.... lol....thats exaggeration ....

I don't think Pete would every say something as ridiculous !
He knows he was the ruler of the 90s and he ain't letting any mentally weak guy win 8-9 slams right under his nose .....
 

RS

Bionic Poster
He gifted Johansson a Slam. That's like the worst Slam winner ever.

Murray from 2010 to 2016 went 10-0 in Slam finals/semis against non-Big3.
Not talking about Murray but the statement about level of play and eye tests all of sudden being okay.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
He gifted Johansson a Slam. That's like the worst Slam winner ever.

Murray from 2010 to 2016 went 10-0 in Slam finals/semis against non-Big3.
And 9/10 were better players than T. Johansson. The list is pretty impressive:

Cilic
Ferrer
Tsonga
Berdych
Janowicz
Berdych
Raonic
Wawrinka
Berdych
Raonic
 
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
Rate all of Murray’s grand slam finals out of 10.
He was darn impressive in the Wimbledon 2012 final that is all I will say. Federer was playing legit at prime level and Murray put up a good fight so given that might be the most impressive of all of them.
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
How many times did Safin reach this mythical peak? A couple of times?

I'd take a player who can play his best tennis consistently over someone who loses Slam finals to Thomas Johansson :oops:

It’s hilarious how much you have to pump up Murray to match your agenda. There’s only 1 big 3 member that was denied slams by the weaponless Scot

The only thing that matters is if you have the guns to win when it counts
 

RS

Bionic Poster
He was darn impressive in the Wimbledon 2012 final that is all I will say. Federer was playing legit at prime level and Murray put up a good fight so given that might be the most impressive of all of them.
Yes that is a good pick.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Your stats r shiz

Same guys reaching semis every slam means your era is the weakest, not strongest.

Look at 90s, how many same guys reached semis ? Who were the big 4 ?

Someone like Andy Murray makes the semis everytime and loses to the big 3 everytime, this gives a stupid illusion that he is better than Safin or Krajicek .... Some lunatics even say that Murray would have 10+ in other era..... LOL.....but then it is not true ..... Safin has beaten Federer at his best while Andy never could beat even an old federer properly, except that 1 win in 2013 which was in Fed's horrible year and that too in 5 long sets

Jeez ... You need 5 sets beat an old injured man, what is the use of getting to all these semis ??? Obv it means outside the top 4-5 players the rest the field is crappy
Well, IMO, the only time the consistency of the top guys could be used as an indicator that the competition is strong is when they actually challenge the top guy's dominance or even actually affect it.

If they have great consistency and reach the later stages regularly, but don't have the level to challenge or affect the dominant guy's reign, then it simply means the rest of the players aren't that good and by default that allows the top guys to reach the later stages regularly.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yeah the only difference is i think 2015 Federer was clearly better than 2005 Hewitt at Wimbledon.
Wimb was a better tournament in 2015 because the final was better and more competitive than in 2005.

If you do a breakdown of the semifinalists:

Federer 2005 > Fed of 2015

Murray = Hewitt

T. Johansson > Gasquet

Djokovic >>>> Roddick.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
He was darn impressive in the Wimbledon 2012 final that is all I will say. Federer was playing legit at prime level and Murray put up a good fight so given that might be the most impressive of all of them.
True.

But it wasn't more impressive than Roddick's 2004/2009 efforts for example.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Well, IMO, the only time the consistency of the top guys could be used as an indicator that the competition is strong is when they actually challenge the top guy's dominance or even actually affect it.

If they have great consistency and reach the later stages regularly, but don't have the level to challenge or affect the dominant guy's reign, then it simply means the rest of the players aren't that good and by default that allows the top guys to reach the later stages regularly.

Yes.
Unfortunately in Sir Andy's case this is what happened baring an year or 2 he never was at that high a level to challenge the Big 3 but he made the semis everytime due to the Raonics and other jokers below him in the draw.

Haters of Federer make it look like Sir Andy would have won 8-10 slams in other eras, how Federer is a weak era champ and all that ...... On Facebook groups I've seen the younger group of Nadal-Djoker fans ( I think most of them started watching Tennis after 2008 but they never accept this) they diss Federer, none of them even rate Sampras in the GOAT Race anymore and say that Pete was an incomplete player with no competition in his time....LOL....

Sameway you can see some guys in this forum as well who pretend to be Sampras fans and Djokovic fans who hate Federer, now that seems weird ..... A true fan of Pete would always appreciate his successor and the brand of Tennis he played in the 00s instead of dissing him and being a fanatic of Novak of all people

That makes me think they are all pretending...
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yes.
Unfortunately in Sir Andy's case this is what happened baring an year or 2 he never was at that high a level to challenge the Big 3 but he made the semis everytime due to the Raonics and other jokers below him in the draw.

Haters of Federer make it look like Sir Andy would have won 8-10 slams in other eras, how Federer is a weak era champ and all that ...... On Facebook groups I've seen the younger group of Nadal-Djoker fans ( I think most of them started watching Tennis after 2008 but they never accept this) they diss Federer, none of them even rate Sampras in the GOAT Race anymore and say he had no competition in his time.

Sameway you can see some guys in this forum as well who pretend to be Sampras fans and Djokovic fans who hate Federer, now that seems weird ..... A true fan of Pete would always appreciate his successor and the brand of Tennis he played in the 00s instead of dissing him and being a fanatic of Novak of all people

That makes me think they are all pretending...
Not surprised Pete fans hate Fed because the latter was the first one to break Pete's records. Nadal and Djokovic followed suit but by that point it wasn't the same as when Federer did it.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Not surprised Pete fans hate Fed because the latter was the first one to break Pete's records. Nadal and Djokovic followed suit but by that point it wasn't the same as when Federer did it.

Yeah, maybe thats 1 reason .... But even then I think most of Sampras fans eventually became Federer fans.

I remember the social networking website ORKUT which was famous in 2004-2008 period (prior to Facebook taking over social media) in India-Pakistan-Brazil etc etc ..... There was Sampras fan club, it had like 10-12K members, the active members as well the moderators used to bash Federer all day on how his game lacks this, lacks that, how Sampras would have demolished Fed and how Nadal is the successor to Pete etc etc :-D

Amusing .... but then the Federer fan club at that time was massive, there were like 100K-140K members in it and many of them were Sampras fans tooo ....

So not every Pete fan was a hater, lot of them eventually came to terms with the successor from the next gen.... it was just a change of guard.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yeah, maybe thats 1 reason .... But even then I think most of Sampras fans eventually became Federer fans.

I remember the social networking website ORKUT which was famous in 2004-2008 period (prior to Facebook taking over social media) in India-Pakistan-Brazil etc etc ..... There was Sampras fan club, it had like 10-12K members, the active members as well the moderators used to bash Federer all day on how his game lacks this, lacks that, how Sampras would have demolished Fed and how Nadal is the successor to Pete etc etc :-D

Amusing .... but then the Federer fan club at that time was massive, there were like 100K-140K members in it and many of them were Sampras fans tooo ....

So not every Pete fan was a hater, lot of them eventually came to terms with the successor from the next gen.... it was just a change of guard.
Foreign words these days.
 
Top