Mustard
Bionic Poster
I suppose Raonic and Dimitrov are the closest at the moment.
Greater Hardcourt Player - Fed vs Nole?
- Thread starter Zain786
- Start date
I suppose Raonic and Dimitrov are the closest at the moment.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Yeah but in fairness it's easier to dominate clay than it is hard courts.
pame
Hall of Fame
ohmigosh, all these "babies" out earning their living on the professional circuit. Somebody call child services quickly - this must surely qualify as child abuse
pame
Hall of Fame
Probably because your pal Chico brings up "baby" Djoko every other word out of his mouth. Fair turnabout
S
Sirius Black
Guest
Rockabye Novak, when at the net,
Winning this point will help win the set,
Oh no, he falls after hitting the ball,
And down goes Novak, title and all.
Last edited by a moderator:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
I knew as soon as that incident occurred that the match was over. What a heartbreaker.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Why do you say that? Because Nadal does it? Nadal does it because he is that good on clay. Nadal's best years on clay in terms of win-loss records were 50-2 in 2005, 26-0 in 2006, 31-1 in 2007, 24-1 in 2008, 22-0 in 2010, 23-1 in 2012 and 39-2 in 2013. Muster was 65-2 on clay in 1995 and 46-3 on clay in 1996, so 111-5 over those two calendar years.
With today's tour being much more uniform due to the compulsory tournaments, and 8 months of the year being predominantly hardcourt, the dynamics have changed a lot compared to the 1990s.
S
Sirius Black
Guest
Nobody get offended at my previous post, please. Have some humor.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Sure, but how come he was mostly playing small clay tournaments all throughout the year? Surely the ATP back then would've allowed him to play lots of HC tournaments as well if such was his wish? Can you say hand on heart that he'd have 44 titles on his resume if he had done? :|
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Two reasons:
1. There were no compulsory tournaments, so players could play wherever they wanted. If they missed majors or masters events (which had more points), they could make up for the lost points by playing a lot of smaller events. There were no 0 pointers back then.
2. Muster had his left knee ligaments crushed in the early hours of 1 April 1989, requiring surgery, and his left leg in a cast from ankle to thigh for 3 months. Playing on hardcourt was painful for his knee after that, while clay was much more forgiving.
Of course.
No, because he wouldn't have been as good on hardcourt, nor could he have played on hardcourt so much because of the knee. Still, Muster proved in 1997 that he could play very well on hardcourt. Only Sampras was better than him on hardcourt that year.
A couple of things to remember when arguing about 'weak era' of lleyton and roddick etc. versus Novak, Andy and rafa now.
a 5 year difference between fed's gen and novak/rafa gen is not that much but a lot of significant changes happened in the game right between these two generations.
- strings: fed and lleyton came onto the tour when natural gut was the best and hard courts were fast/grass was fast and guys were either clay courters, serve volleyers or counter punchers. They were specialists.
- Hewitt on the hard courts he played on, i.e. FAST, slick hard courts are very different to what hard courts are now. Couple that with him using natural gut strings back in 2001/2002 and how i simply cannot comprehend how new age fanboys compare novak 2011 to hewitt 02. Do you guys really think Novak can hit the same passing shots with natural gut strings on faster courts back then?
- Roddick's serve was massive back then and he had one of the biggest forehands in the game, he was quick to and competed harder than novak and murray
Dont underrate these guys and what they achieved;
- ON his way to the wimbledon title hewitt didn't miss a second serve return until the QUARTER-FINALS…thats on slick grass with uneven bounces too remember.
The game is completely different. They are basically two different eras. For federer to dominate in the quick early days and still adapt and be at the top 10 years later is pretty remarkable.
I'm not sure it's ok to compare 9 HC slam titles to 5, especially when Novak has lost to a tired Nishikori and Murray.
a 5 year difference between fed's gen and novak/rafa gen is not that much but a lot of significant changes happened in the game right between these two generations.
- strings: fed and lleyton came onto the tour when natural gut was the best and hard courts were fast/grass was fast and guys were either clay courters, serve volleyers or counter punchers. They were specialists.
- Hewitt on the hard courts he played on, i.e. FAST, slick hard courts are very different to what hard courts are now. Couple that with him using natural gut strings back in 2001/2002 and how i simply cannot comprehend how new age fanboys compare novak 2011 to hewitt 02. Do you guys really think Novak can hit the same passing shots with natural gut strings on faster courts back then?
- Roddick's serve was massive back then and he had one of the biggest forehands in the game, he was quick to and competed harder than novak and murray
Dont underrate these guys and what they achieved;
- ON his way to the wimbledon title hewitt didn't miss a second serve return until the QUARTER-FINALS…thats on slick grass with uneven bounces too remember.
The game is completely different. They are basically two different eras. For federer to dominate in the quick early days and still adapt and be at the top 10 years later is pretty remarkable.
I'm not sure it's ok to compare 9 HC slam titles to 5, especially when Novak has lost to a tired Nishikori and Murray.
Also, regarding fed and novak's h2h on hard, i have to say that the faster the court the more it favours federer, the slower the hard court the more it favours novak.
Novak is good on fast hard, but fed is a bit better with his attacking forehand and slices/better serve.
Novak defends and stays in the point longer on the slower court
Novak is good on fast hard, but fed is a bit better with his attacking forehand and slices/better serve.
Novak defends and stays in the point longer on the slower court
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Ok, his accident would certainly explain his preference for clay over hard courts but surely you can understand why so many feel that he was simply a one surface player given that 40 of his titles came on clay? :-|
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Agree entirely.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Zep believes that Ferrer is equal to Hewitt in playing level.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
You still dont say which period so that I can think of it. So in essence your point is that Rafole are not dominating the lacklustre young generation not because they are incapable of dominating but because the younger lot are not meeting them in slam finals. Sounds more like DNP = 1R.
Doesn't matter to be honest, Rafole have themselves to contest with. Which itself anyway gives less room for youngsters to break into finals.
powerangle
Legend
If Nole hadn't mentally choke away USO 2013 and USO 2014, it would have been "interesting". But the way things panned out...nah, Nole won't do it and it's his own damn fault. 
Chico
Banned
Terrible poetry, offensive and not funny at all.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Zep believes that Ferrer is equal to Hewitt in playing level.
Wut?
That reeks of an agenda if he did say that.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Rewritten by yours truly to bring it up to standard:
Mother Goose said:
You were right, it didn't flow properly.
Inb4 you say this is rubbish, while "Brave Sir Roger" is just fine. :evil:
That net point was Novak's own failing.
"Brave Sir Roger" was a highly offensive piece of rubbish making fun of an injured player.
It flowed well, but that was Monty Python's doing, not yours.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chico
Banned
You have never watched Monty Python? Didn't you? Today's youth. :roll: Deprived of real art, beauty and values.
Clearly have huge holes in your education, since you can't distinguish between a worthless junk, which is what you two display here as some kind of poetry, and real art which is "Brave Sir Roger" inspired by timeless and ingenious Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
I have definitely watched Monty Python.
I own most of it, and all of the movies.
But it was twisted by someone on here into something highly offensive towards an injured player, who also happens to be the foremost student of the game and commanding of a high degree of respect.
It was abuse of MP's fine work.
That rhyme wasn't as offensive, even if it was also not as well written.
Chico
Banned
Brave Sir Roger was pure gold. Peace of art. Thanks for reminding me. Since we are doing poetry in this thread now here it is:
:lol: Yes the thread title reminded me of Sir Robin indeed:
Great work on the poem BTW. Spelt my coffee reading it.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
If we are talking HC exclusively, Federer had stronger young players to deal with in 2007 and 2008: Djokovic and Murray. Both reached slam finals at 20 (Djokovic) and 21(Murray)) respectively, which means they were better players at that age than today's players at 23 (Dimitrov) and 24 (Raonic) respectively.
Federer had tougher younger players to deal with back in his prime than Nadal and Djokovic do now
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Ridiculous to even mention Djokovic. Federer has unparalleled streaks on hard court. Djokovic is the beneficiary of the wet cardboard version of hard court also known as plexicushion.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
1. So your point is there are no 20-21 year old as good as Djokovic and Murray on HCs today? Or are you implying Nadal and Djokovic don't face the same competition on HCs overall as Federer did when he was 27? I agree with former, but it has no relevance. How does it matter in what age form they face competition?
2. Also, the chances for young Djokovic and Murray to make to Slam finals were higher then when they were the second best hard court players in those two years. They only had to deal with Federer. Today the youngsters - of whatever age group - have to deal with 2 to 3 greats on the surface.
Hmm... that depends upon certain ballerina dancer, a weak player in general, plays Tennis as hobby not profession, wins hard court GS or not. Litmus test you can say.
Litmus says 2004-07 were obvious weak years on hard court with Weak Ballerina winning 7/8 hard court GS. AO 2008 was obvious strongest era with most complete player Kingovic winning it. Then again weakest at USO with Ballerina prevailing. After that era was strongest with exception of AO 2010, with Swiss Ballerina prevailing again.
2011 to present- Strongest Golden Era of Tennis with no GS titles to weak Ballerina on hard as litmus showing me.
Last edited:
S
Sirius Black
Guest
^This. How is it offensive? It's what happened, right?
For the record, I wanted Djokovic to win that match.
Also, for the record, I'm not a bad poet - I once wrote a coherent conclusion for a paper on Hamlet in the form of a Shakespearean sonnet. But judge someone based on one thing they decided to write on the internet, correct? Person-situation controversy.
Federer is the greater hardcourt player at the moment.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
From that 5 Nole is now at 14. Should have been more if not for pandemic. In USO 13 he said his best tennis days were ahead of him. Even I thought he was kidding but he knows himself better than rest of us.
Outside slams, Nole was already better when I subtract Federer age. Federer won 4 ATP finals by age 27, Nole was 27 at 2014 and won same.
Fed had way less masters than Djokovic on hc.
Slam finals Djokovic already had 9 finals at hc by 2014 year end and fed had 8 I think.
It's only the usopens that Nole was lagging behind.
Outside slams, Nole was already better when I subtract Federer age. Federer won 4 ATP finals by age 27, Nole was 27 at 2014 and won same.
Fed had way less masters than Djokovic on hc.
Slam finals Djokovic already had 9 finals at hc by 2014 year end and fed had 8 I think.
It's only the usopens that Nole was lagging behind.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
GS finals
Federer 7 each Djokovic 10 each
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Slam HC top 10 matches and winning %
Djokovic 54 (after bans and defaults)
Federer 53
Djokovic 76%
Federer 70%
Djokovic 54 (after bans and defaults)
Federer 53
Djokovic 76%
Federer 70%
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Always great to see these old posts aging so poorly 
Similar threads
- Poll
- Deleted member 792641
- General Pro Player Discussion
