how many slams would fed have won if he faced 03-06 opponents his whole career?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by dominikk1985, Jan 31, 2013.


how many slams

  1. less than 17

    7 vote(s)
  2. 17

    5 vote(s)
  3. 17-19

    11 vote(s)
  4. 20-22

    11 vote(s)
  5. 23-25

    12 vote(s)
  6. 26+

    23 vote(s)
  1. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    yeah, of course, you'd start with matches like RG 2008 final, Olympics 2012 final etc etc ....

    gimme a break, your observation skills are darn poor ... you even said game-wise fed was close to his best in the AO 2013 SF vs murray , LOL !

    I massively owned you there with a comparison with the AO 2011 SF and you slunk away ...

    both would have their chances vs rafa .... roddick probably a bit more so ...

    yeah, just because djoker was only beaten by federer in USO 2007-09 doesn't mean in-form roddick/hewitt couldn't beat him there ...

    as far as AO 2009 goes, that just shows the possibility that prime hewitt/roddick , both of whom were pretty fit, could outlast pre-2011 djoker ... also roddick was in the clear lead when djoker retired ...

    lol wut ? how many of these guys did murray beat to get his US Open title in 2012 ? only djokovic ...and cilic choked massively in their match...had he not, maybe murray wouldn't have won or even he had won, the effort required would've been more and he'd probably be more exhausted than he was ... and that could've cost him big time in the semi or the final ...

    lol @ mentioning 06 RG, 11 RG,wim 08 for rafa :

    djoker was not even top 15 @ the time of RG 06 IIRC ...

    RG 2011, murray isn't better than hewitt on clay ... atleast hewitt beat kuerten @ davis cup in 2001 ... what exactly has murray done on clay ? yeah, reached the semi in 2011, but required a massive choke from troicki there ...

    wimbledon 2008 for murray ? really ? hadn't he *almost* lost to gasquet in straights in the round before ? he hadn't even won a masters title ...first one was cincy 2008 ...

    like I've said before , nadal's returning vs huge servers is a relative weak point ... he would struggle vs the roddick serve ....

    roddick/hewitt breaking into the top 4 is ridiculous ? LOL, they could've been ahead of djoker/murray in 2009/2010 and murray in 2008/2011 of course we have a #4 in david ferrer ( yeah, due to nadal's injury, but the point stays )
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2013
  2. kragster

    kragster Hall of Fame

    Jul 8, 2011
    I realize this is a speculative thread and everyone can make their own grand claims. But I can bet that at the end of the day, total slam count is what will determine how strong a player is considered to be. Just like Fed detractors will never be able to diminish Fed's stature by making weak era claims, Fed fanboys will never be able to elevate his 03-06 competition beyond what their records show (except Agassi of course who will always be considered a legend).I personally have nothing against Roddick and Hewitt but they will never be mentioned in the same breath as Novak and Nadal. I can't think of ANY commentator who makes the claim that these guys are basically the same level as Roddick/Hewitt etc and simply benefited from having to not face a prime Fed.

    Prime Fed > Prime Nadal/Nole >Old Fed (2010-2012)> Prime Hewitt/Roddick
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2013
  3. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    No, but I'd go with USO11, AO09, AO12 and RG11.

    LOL WTF are you on about? Get it right, I said Fed was just as determined against Novak and Rafa as he was against Murray, but he still couldn't push them to 5. I then said Fed played a pretty good ground game in AO13 and his serve improved after the first set which is true.

    That comparison was a complete waste of your time because it didn't help your argument one bit, if anything it backed up my point :lol:

    LOL Hewitt would beat an in form Rafa at WIM? Peak Fed was barely able to do it you fool. Roddick otoh wouldn't either but I agree he'd have a better chance than Hewitt.

    Roddick was in pretty good form in their 08 USO meeting. He routined Gonzalez who was the Olympic finalist on the way to the qtr final and Novak routined him in the first 2 sets. The match got closer after that but Novak still ultimately took care of him.

    Either way, even if they did get past Novak at the US Open, the chances of them getting past him AND Fed or Rafa are extremely low, as in not happening.

    Yeah no **** Sherlock, obviously Roddick was in the lead because Novak was ailed by heat exhaustion lol what a dumb comment.

    And once again even if they got past Novak, they wouldn't get past Fed in 09 AO form especially and not a chance against Rafa in 09AO form as well.

    Let's put it into perspective; Neither Hewitt nor Roddick would be any chance whatsoever to win RG.

    RG titles = ZERO!

    With the AO, let's say they're the same age as Rafa,Novay and Murray - they wouldn't be winning AO07 with the form Federer was in, they wouldn't win AO08 with Novak's form, they wouldn't win 09AO with Rafa and Fed's form, they wouldn't win AO10 with Fed and Murray's form, they wouldn't win AO11 with Novak's form, they wouldn't win AO12 with Rafa and Novak's form. Even Fed and Murray were playing pretty well in that one as well. They wouldn't win AO13 with Novak and Murray's form.

    AO titles = ZERO!

    Now it's Wimbledon's turn. 07, not happening with the form Rafa and Fed were in. 08 even worse. 09 Roddick would be a good chance, they played each other in that major so one would cancel out the other, but then again I can't imagine Roddick playing much better than he did in that 09 final and he still lost that one.
    2010 Wimbledon they wouldn't beat Rafa up there, Rafa breezed by Soderling after the first set, beat Murray in straights and then beat a red hot Berdych in straights as well. 2011 WIM they wouldn't be getting past Rafa, Fed, Novak or even Tsonga. 2012 WIM Murray and Fed were in too good form for them as well.

    WIM titles = (possibly but unlikely 1 to Roddick)

    USO:- 2007 Fed's winning that one. 2008 same. 2009 Del po's title he was good enough to beat Rafa and Fed one after the other something that Hewitt and Roddick could only dream of in a major. 2010 Rafa far too good for those 2. 2011 Novak far too good for them. Fed and Rafa as well. 2012 Novak and Murray would be too good for them.

    USO titles = ZERO!

    So that leaves possibly 1 WIM title to Roddick and zero to Hewitt.

    You're not very good at maths are you? Murray cannot beat himself therefore Murray is not an obstacle for Murray. However, Murray IS an obstacle for both Hewitt and Roddick. Therefore they would most likely have had to beat 2 if not 3 of the big four IN A ROW to win a major. You know how hard that is? Only Del Potro has been able to do it apart from Fed, Rafa and Novak.

    Why? Because it's his best major? Ok then let's lol at mentioning Fed's 08 USO because Murray played like a fart in that final compared to his semi.

    I know he wasn't, but it's still a FACT that Rafa beat him and Fed in the same major. But yeah it doesn't mean much all things considered, much like Fed's 07 AO win against Novak.

    Tell me how many RG semi's has Hewitt made it to? If you actually watched that RG11 semi, Murray played quite well against Rafa generated a lot of BP chances IIRC similar to Fed in 07RG final in terms of BP opportunities.

    Doesn't mean he was crap, USO was only a few months after WIM. Murray was on the rise at the time and played a very close AO 5 setter against Rafa in 07. Again if WIM08 doesn't count for Rafa then 08 USO doesn't count for Fed especially considering Murray played better in that 08WIMqtr than he did in that 08 USO final.

    Absolute rubbish, Rafa has never lost to Karlovic, Raonic or Isner. Rosol didn't beat Rafa ust because of the serve he played first strike tennis with his ground strokes as well and it just clicked for him that night. Roddick became a pusher in terms of his ground game, Rafa would've handled him just fine. Let's not forget Rafa did beat him in their only grass encounter and the grass at WIM10 was slower than grass at WIM in the 90's.

    Murray 08? LOL Murray wasn't top 4 until late 08, I'm talking about once Murray established himself in the top 4 along with Novak, Fed and Rafa.

    As for 09 Novak he made 5 Masters finals, winning Paris. His 4 final losses were to Murray, Fed and Rafa. What a surprise lol. He also won Dubai, Belgrade, Beijing and Basel along with that Paris Masters. 5 titles, 1 Masters to go with making the AO qtrs, only 3rd rnd RG, WIM qtrs and US semis. No majors. It was his 3rd year in the top 4. Win - Loss = 78 - 19

    Now let's compare that with Roddick and Hewitt's third year in the top 10:

    Roddick 3rd year top 4 = 2005

    AO semis, WIM final, but only 1st rd USO and 2nd rnd RG. Masters finals = 1 and he lost to Fed. He won San Jose, Houston, London, Washington and Lyon. So 5 titles, no masters, no majors. He's not getting ahead of Novak 09 with those results. Win - Loss = 59 - 14

    Hewitt 3rd year in top 4 = 2003

    No majors, 4th rnd AO, first round exit at RG and WIM, qtrs USO. Only won Scottsdale and Indian Wells. So, nope he didn't have a better 3rd year as top 4 than Novak did in 09. Win - Loss = 37 - 10

    2010 was Novak's 4th year in the top 4. He made the US Open final, won Davis Cup, qtrs of AO and RG and WIM semi. He won Dubai and Beijing. Win - Loss = 61 - 18

    2006, Roddick's 4th year in top 4: Dropped out of top 4. 4th rnd AO, 1st rnd RG and 3rd rnd WIM, final USO. Won Cincy. Win - Loss 49 - 20. Nope not overtaking 2010 Novak here.

    2004, Hewitt's 4th year in top 4: AO 4th rnd, RG qtr, WIM qtr, USO final. Won Sydney, Rotterdam, Washington and Long Island. Win - Loss 68 - 18. Must be said very close call here, but considering Novak overall performed better at majors and won Davis Cup, he gets the edge, just.

    2011 was Murray's 3rd year as an established top 4 player. His results:
    Final in AO, semis in the remaining 3 majors. ALL far better than what Hewitt and Roddick did in their respective third year as a top 4 player. Hewitt's 04 < Murray 2012 that is quite obvious.

    So since it's only fair to compare their respective third and fourth years as established top 4 players, it is quite clear that you're wrong :grin:
  4. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    AO 2009, USO 11 are fair enough ...

    RG 2011 was good, but that stretch of 8 games (?) he lost after being up 5-2, setpoint in the first set spoilt it big time ...

    AO 2012 was a bit too hit and miss , not that good by prime fed's standards

    pretty good ground game ? lol, he was getting overpowered by murray on the FH side FFS seriously need to get your eyes/brain tested ! his serve didn't have much it in either ...

    he served @ 64% in the semi vs novak in wimbledon 2012, that's a good % but not that high , but he had him seriously handcuffed on the return because the quality of his serving was that good , in particular the 2nd serve ....

    bwahaha ! face it, you ran away because you couldn't answer it ..

    how did murray outplay federer by such a margin points % wise and win 3 sets convincingly, whereas novak/nadal did that in only one set vs fed in 2 matches combined ? unless you want to suggest murray was that much better than novak/nadal in those matches ? :lol:

    you just ran away like when I embarrassed you big time when you showcased your cluelessness about the likes of ferrero, haas, baghdatis etc ...

    not to mention you seem to think agassi was anywhere near injured/crippled vs federer in USO 2004 ...... LOL, agassi was perfectly fit and fine ..

    oh and wait, he couldn't last over 5 sets vs federer ? really ? when the match was close to 3 hrs long ? who do you think they are ? rafa and nole and murray to go on and on and on ? also when the match was suspended after 3 sets ?

    the first 3 sets were played in normal conditions , fed won 2 of those sets ... match was suspended for that day

    then the last 2 sets were played in absolutely horrid windy conditions ... that changed things quite a bit ..otherwise good chance that fed could've closed it out in 4 ...

    not to forget, agassi was playing some darn good tennis ; go ahead , I want to see how much of a fool you can make out of yourself :lol:

    yeah, hewitt would have a chance ... and roddick an even better one ...

    nope, roddick played a rubbish 1st set, was better in the 2nd, but still not good ; once he picked up it from 3rd set onwards, nole found it much harder .... just about managed to close it in the 4th ...

    eh, LOL, what ? except for rafa @ USO 2010, they'd have a good chance of beating rafa at the USO ..... I'm sure they'd have loved to play a federer serving as badly as he did in the USO 2009 final .... roddick took a federer playing quite a bit better to 16-14 in the 5th @ wimbledon .....

    heh, no, that's not necessary ....things could open up like they did for murray in USO 2012 with nadal out , fed playing a terrible match vs berdych, cilic choking massively vs him ... or if they could catch murray playing sh*t tennis like in AO 2011, or him being eliminated by cilic/wawrinka/verdasco or if nadal/federer weren't serving well like in USO 2009 or rafa being injured in AO 2011 ...

    haas beat djoker comfortably in wimbledon 2009 , roddick of course beat murray in wimbledon 2009 , djoker in AO 2009 ...

    hell, past his prime hewitt had a very close match vs delpo @ washington just before the USO in 2009 ...

    I could see prime hewitt/roddick having a darn good chance beating rafa before the finals in wimbledon 2007 ...

    so many things come into the picture here , but you obviously can't think much seem to 'flying' under the *assumption* that all of 4 of them were playing well in all slams in those years from 2009 till now ... LOL !!!

    they're not winning RG obviously and AO is a long shot ... but they'd have their chances @ wimbledon and USO ... especially with fed's decline ....

    did you even read ? murray only reached the semi courtesy of a massive choke from troicki ...yeah, murray played well by 'his' standards on clay in the semi, but nothing special in general ....

    and rafa in RG 2007 final was quite a bit better than rafa in RG 2011 semi, so the comparison b/w fed/murray in that respect doesn't exactly hold good ..

    hewitt actually took a set off rafa @ 2006 RG ... when rafa was actually better than in 2011 RG

    played him very close @ hamburg in 2007 , though nadal wasn't exactly at his best here

    yeah, like I said, you have no clue ... roddick was just coming off a shoulder injury in queens 2008 ...

    rosol's groundstrokes were also a major part of his win, but rafa struggled vs his serve , that's a fact ...

    also struggled vs isner's/soderling's serving in RGs, struggled vs haase/petzschener in wim 10 when they were serving well ...

    rafa won only 14% of the first serve return points vs roddick in miami 2010 , and that's a slow, high bouncing HC

    only 14% of the first serve return points vs karlovic in queens 2008 , karlovic had 35 aces vs him out a total of 108 service points ....(is the no of aces a record for best of 3 match (3rd set ending in breaker )? )

    he had no clue what to do vs the muller serve for the first 2 sets in wimbledon 2011 ... muller of course went away completely after losing the 2nd breaker ...

    lol, I skipped quoting the rest of your cr*p ....

    why on earth is it only fair to compare respective 3rd and 4th years as established top 4 players ?

    hewitt had to keep on facing fed before the semis in quite a few tournaments 2004 before he could make his way back up and that hurt him quite a bit ...

    roddick in 2003/2004 was considerably better than in 2006 and better than he was in 2005 ....
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  5. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Jun 6, 2010
    The logic of these topics is inherently circular because it compares variables dependent on each other but assumes they are independent. Players push each other to a higher level to win. It's a career-long battle outside of the individual matches, to reach the level of your top rivals and maintain that level. There is always a context a tour will experience during an era. The further ahead the top guy is, the faster guys try to improve to have a chance. Federer raised the bar for some time, then Nadal raised it in some other aspects of the game, etc.

    Also who knows, maybe if Federer was born in 87 the world would be in nuclear winter right now. Alternate timeline.
  6. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    RG11 was because Fed can't handle beating Rafa at RG. He didn't choke, he went for a drop shot and missed it by half an inch. That was the beginning of what cost him the momentum. Once Rafa catches fire at RG nobody has any chance.

    AO12 Fed was playing very well against Rafa. That 6-2 set is deceiving score wise, but when Rafa got that first break it was due to 3 incredible shots. The return at Fed's feet when he tried S&V, the FH from the player's entrance and the BH passing shot DTL.

    Don't know how to answer what? What is the question? LOL. I never once said he played better against Murray you just don't know how to read. You said Fed was determined against Murray which is why he was able to push it to 5, I said that he was just as determined against Rafa and Novak the previous years. The fact that his game was better PROVES that. But whatever helps you sleep at night.

    What cluelessness? Where I said Novak in title winning form wouldn't lose a set to Haas and Baggy? You said Baggy's form wasn't good in AO09, well so wasn't Novak's yet he still only just scraped a set. If Novak was hitting more cleanly he has much more scope for playing at a higher level than Baggy does, that's just common sense. Novak high level >>>>>> Baggy high level so therefore he'd take care of him no prob. And let's just say hypothetically Novak did lose the first set to Baggy, no way is he allowing Baggy to almost go up a double break in the second set.

    As for Haas, he was in **** form he got bageled in the second set and only came back because Fed dropped his level. Once Fed was in trouble and forced to a 5th he raised his level again and Haas was no contest for him.

    He was BORN with a spinal deficiency. As he aged that gave him trouble, not to mention he wasn't the player he was when he was 25 right? I mean that's the consensus with you *******s regarding Federer, it's supposed to be some superhuman effort for him at 31 to play well, well then Agassi at 34 and a half playing well against PEAK Fed must be even more incredible then. Either that or peak Fed isn't what you all want to crack him up to be, and believe me he isn't.

    What are you a parrot? OK I get it you think Hewitt would have a chance, good for you but everyone knows you wouldn't be betting your house on him to win vs Rafa in the 2010 WIM final, you'd be putting it all on Rafa if you were forced to pick one. Same with Roddick.

    How did prime Roddick go in the 2005 US Open? I'd say 2008 was better...

    Wimbledon is not US Open, you can't transfer form from one major to another. FACT Roddick has never beat Fed at US Open. Fed serving bad still nearly beat Del Potro but it was Del Po's ground game that won him the match, Roddick was a pusher after 2004.

    Even with Rafa out and Fed out early in 2012 USO, Roddick and/or Hewitt would still need to beat both Murray and Novak to win. It's that simple, why you trying to twist things?

    If they faced Novak at 2011 AO final they would've lost so it doesn't matter if they'd beat Murray, like I said they'd get past one occasionally but not 2.

    I just outlined every major and their chances of winning given the form of the winners and all you can come up with is Haas beat Novak in WIM09 and this one beat Novak and Murray here and there LOL. You got nothing pal so keep back pedalling.

    Roddick beating Novak in AO09 has no bearing whatsoever because he would've had to beat Federer and Rafa to win it and we all know that was never going to happen given their form in that tournament FFS how stupid can you be?

    I already said that Roddick could possibly get WIM09, but then again I can't imagine him playing much better than he did in that final and he still lost.

    As for the 09 USO, Hewitt in his prime would get beat by Rafa, Fed and Del Po in that tournament. Hewitt would in no way whatsoever dominate against Rafa like Del Po did in the base line rallies. Even with the ab tear, Rafa still would've beat him. Roddick no chance against Del Po there and Fed or even Rafa for that matter.

    And LOL at prime Roddick beating Rafa or Fed at WIM 07, massive LOL. Prime Roddick, Roddick was in his prime in 2007 FFS he lost to Gasquet of all people on grass, yet he was going to beat Rafa LOL. Hewitt was #1 seed at WIM03, you can't be any better placed than that and he went out in the first round. So please outline which prime years are we talking here? Since 2001 Hewitt's WIM results were:

    01 - 4th rnd, 02 - WIN, 03 - 1st rnd, 04- QF, 05 - SF, 06-QF 07 -4th rnd.

    So assuming his prime years were from 01 - 06

    2006 he got beat fairly comfortably against Baggy LOL. Same as what happened to him at AO06. Sure there were 2 competitive sets but that was it lol.

    2005 he got straight setted by Fed, although that doesn't really tell the whole story, but still his form in 05 WIM wouldn't have been enough to beat 2007 Rafa.

    2004, same thing with Hewitt played a decent tournament but not enough to take out Rafa07.

    2003 obviously would've got slaughtered.

    2001 same.

    That leaves 2002, the year he won. Look at Rafa's 07 WIM draw again. He ALMOST won it. Look at Hewitt's 02 draw again and tell me it doesn't make you chuckle. He almost lost to Sjeng Shalken LOL. 3 of the top 20 didn't make it past the 3rd round. Of course Hewitt looked good in some of those matches he played a pack of nobody's and yes Nalby was pretty much a nobody at the time. No chance at beating 07 Rafa.

    You just don't get it do you? Hewitt and Roddick were waaayyy more up and down in majors and masters during their prime years than Novak and Murray were, let alone Fed and Rafa. Yet somehow they're going to break into top 4 after Murray/Novak/Fed/Rafa were in it? Stop embarrassing yourself.
  7. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    Did you even read? I said Murray was similar to fed07 IN TERMS OF BP CHANCES. Not in terms of level played.

    No, RG11 Rafa was better than 06. In 06 he lost sets against multiple opponents, in 11 yes he had one bad match against Isner, but Rafa raised his level considerably after Isner got that third set. After that he beat everyone in straight sets including Soderling who was the finalist of the past 2 years at the time and Murray despite having so many BP against him. Then Fed was the only other player to take a set off him and Fed was in top form in that tournament.

    Hewitt taking one set doesn't justify anything he's played Rafa more times at Rg than Murray so he had more chances to take a set. The other 3 sets were routine.

    So Roddick winning in Miami 2010 justifies him beating Rafa in Wimbledon? The serve alone will not get the job done against Rafa at Wimbledon, you need to have a solid ground game as well. As much as Roddick's serve would potentially trouble Nadal, Nadal's ground game would trouble Roddick FAR more especially on grass were movement is paramount against Rafa unless you can play first strike like Rosol did but then again we all know Roddick became a pusher.

    You skipped it because you have no answer. You're running with your tail between your legs after you said they'd crack the top 4 if they were in their prime I highlighted exactly the same time in their prime vs Novak and Murray and they don't measure up.

    Roddick was better in 03 and 04 than 05 and 06, but then again Novak was better in 07 and 08 than 09 and 2010 so you have no argument here pal. Their worst years since making top 4 coincidentally coincide with each other. i.e Novak's worst years since top 4 were his 3rd and 4th, same with Roddick except Roddick went on with the crapness for longer because he's not as good.

    Hewitt's 04 was one of his best seasons and even that BARELY measures up to Novak's 2010 season. As I said it's VERY close but Novak gets the nod because he won Davis Cup and performed better at the majors. FACT is they would'nt break into the top 4 with today's gen, I proved it, you have no answer, move along.
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  8. SLD76

    SLD76 G.O.A.T.

    Aug 31, 2009
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    prime hewitt and roddick had the misfortune of having the same prime as Fed.

    djoker and murray are getting the better of fed now that he is getting older but fed still is racking up big wins against them.

    FO 2011
    WB 2012
    WTF semi, didnt fed beat murray in straights? And this is a tourny murray really wanted to win, after a summer where he won olympic gold in london and his first major. You can bet your house he wanted to cap the year with a WTF victory in London.

    put it like this. Fed from 2006 probably wins the AO 2008 and AO 2012 even against this prime djoker. Ill concede djoker still may have won AO 2011, but I dont think he matched that same form this final..and I def see fed getting past murray to make the final.

    2006 Fed doesnt lose to berdych in 2012 USO and at the very least beats murray to get to the final. And given that I wasnt impressed with djoker's form in the final, could very well have won it.

    So all of a sudden, thats murray's lone slam gone, and 2 possibly 3 taken from djoker.

    all of a sudden thats zero slams for murray and 3 or 4 for djoker.

    all of a sudden, they look 'weaker' no?
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  9. DragonBlaze

    DragonBlaze Hall of Fame

    Jun 9, 2008
    LOL abmk and The_Order, you guys are at it AGAIN?! :lol:

    You guys should just agree to disagree.....
  10. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    lol, wut ? rafa just played picked up his level after that , but he didn't catch fire ... fed started making all sorts of mistakes after that missed chance

    fed had something like 10 winners and 5 UEs until then, he ended the set with 10 winners and 16 UEs (IIRC)

    again, your observations skills are **** poor ..

    eh, no ... he was too hit and miss; he was forced to go for it, because he knew grinding with rafa over best of 5 was at that age wasn't going to be easy ...

    his game was significantly lesser in the murray match ....

    a determined federer wouldn't have started the breaker that badly in the 3rd set vs nadal, he wouldn't have have allowed novak to get back from 5-2 in the 2nd,wouldn't play a terrible 1st set breaker vs novak etc etc ... Like I said, you are clueless ...

    I suppose this was your alter ego then ? :lol:

    agassi @ that age still didn't have the mileage that federer does ... his career trajectory was unusual ... he was clearly better in 2003-05 than he was in many years in the 90s .... though obviously not better than his best time frames like HC swing 94 to HC swing 95 or RG 99 to AO 2000 ....

    but that's a concept your thick head doesn't get ... you never saw how well again agassi was playing vs safin in AO 2004 or vs fed in USO 2004 .... he did play well vs fed in AO 2005 as well, fed was just too good there ... even in USO 2005, he'd have had almost anyone on a string the way he was striking the ball ( till set 3 ) , even with movement and back problems ....

    what happened to strong era murray after 2 sets and a bit vs novak in the AO 2013 final ? LOL !

    Secondly federer can still play very good matches , like RG 2011 SF, wimbledon 2012 SF & F, TMC 2011 RR match vs nadal, cincy 2012 vs djoker etc ; just that the consistency over matches and even within a match isn't there many times ....

    and believe me peak fed is just as good as I think and much better than what you think; you are just clueless, when you think fed played a very good ground game or served well vs murray in AO 2013 , that itself shows you are total clueless ...

    yeah, he got beat by the big serving muller there in 1R ... but he was quite a bit better in 2003,04,06,07 USOs ...

    there were occasions in which roddick did play aggressively .... djoker had loads of problems vs pusher roddick .... wimbledon is not US Open, but roddick has played darn well at both ... so has hewitt

    only murray/novak weren't 'that' impressive in USO 2012 ... djoker was a bit up and down & had his problems with the wind ... murray was about to go down 2 sets to love vs cilic ...

    yeah, no clueless, that isn't the whole thing .... there were more threats those days before the semis ...hewitt only lost to the eventual winners in all the slams he played from 2004-05 ... roddick's only real 'bad' performance in non-RG slams in 2003-05 came vs muller in 2005 US Open and that was a first round match vs a big server ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  11. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    yeah, so what is the relevance ? absolutely nothing ....

    eh, WTF ? he was down 1-5, love-40 vs andujar and it took some mega-choking from andujar and some fighting from rafa to save 4 SPs and save that set ... the first set was close as well ..

    soderling wasn't playing well at all in RG 2011

    there wasn't much difference in the scoreline vs an old ljubic in RG 2011 and a young one in RG 2006 ....

    rafa lost sets to multiple opponents in RG 2006 - one to an inspired PHM in front of his home crowd, one to hewitt and one to fed ... jeez , that's terrible , much worse than RG 2011 where he was about to get breadsticked by andujar ( & was down two sets to one vs isner ) , right !?

    yeah, no sh*t Sherlock .... hewitt wasn't good in RG 2009 ... when he did play decent tennis, he had a somewhat competitive match vs rafa in RG 2010 ...just like murray did in RG 2011 ...

    yeah, you know it wasn't that roddick couldn't play aggressively at all after 2003-04 ...when he actually did vs rafa at dubai 2008, he dominated him, when he did it at miami 2010, he completely turned the match around ...

    yeah, only hewitt kept running into fed in 2004, otherwise he'd have a had much better season ...novak got lucky with fed playing a terrible match in USO 2010, otherwise he'd wouldn't have reached the final obv ...

    hewitt/roddick wouldn't be ahead of novak in 2008 , but they could be easily be ahead of murray to be #4 ..... in 2007, novak was pretty good in parts, but he wasn't that good in some of the others ....can still see the small possibility of them going ahead of novak there ...

    in 2009-10, they'd have their chances to be ahead of murray & even novak ....

    in 2011, they could be ahead of murray ...

    in 2012, they could be ahead of nadal who didn't play after wimbledon ...

    put their good years in any of these and explain how the hell they couldn't break into the top 4 at any stage !? LOL, you are just clueless and a total hypocrite ....
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  12. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    Of course he started making mistakes he's human, he had a chance to take the first set, just missed out by half an inch and against Rafa at RG that would've definitely been on his mind. Not to mention that when Nadal broke whilst down 3-5 he got 2 UE's from Fed and 2 FE's. But Nadal also gave Fed a UE as well which cancels out one of Fed's so really one UE that cost Fed the break back.

    The second time Nadal broke at 5-5 he hit a running FH winner UTL. Then he hit a FH passing shot UTL winner, Forced an error from Fed with a good BH UTL, showed incredible reflexes at the net and then put away a volley, Fed sooked about his serve being in then Rafa hit a deep FH in which Fed couldn't pick up properly on the half volley and hit the net. So yes, Rafa did catch fire you just can't bear to remember I assume. LOL.

    What a load of ****. He won the first set, outright got outplayed in the second set and in that 3rd set TB, Fed didn't get out-grinded like you say. First point Nadal got was from Fed missing an easy volley mainly due to him trying to do too much with it because of Nadal's defending earlier in the match. Next point Rafa hit a powerful CC BH that sent Fed wide, followed with a drop shot that Fed made it to but Rafa put away the easy volley. Third point Fed JUST misses a BH UTL. Fourth point Fed shanks BH. Fifth point Nadal hits a CC BH passing shot. Sixth point Fed hits a FH UTL into the tape of the net and the final point Rafa dictated play after the serve and Fed retrieved Rafa's FH using a FH squash shot that went into the net. A forced error.

    So really only the BH UTL miss and the FH net miss were the only shots where Fed went for it and lost them.

    Fourth set Fed was getting back into it but Nadal hit an amazing defensive lob, outplaying Fed in the crucial moments yet again. And so therefore you are once again wrong.

    So Fed wasn't as determined against Rafa and Novak? Is that what you're trying to say, if so why wouldn't Fed be as determined against them? It makes NO sense whatsoever. You say a determined Fed wouldn't have started the 3rd set TB that badly, yet you conveniently leave out his TB in the first set which contradicts what you say. And Fed didn't allow Novak back into the second set, Novak fought back. According to you if Federer is determined he should never lose a TB :grin: and if he does lose a TB that's evidence he wasn't determined. LOL he would be embarrassed by a fan like you to actually think he didn't have determination in important matches against his rivals.

    Read again, I was asking what you were referring to and checking to see whether it was where I said Novak wouldn't lose a set to Haas and Baggy. I know I said that and the fact that I backed up my view on it in the very next paragraph should've made it clear but obviously not to someone as illiterate as you.

    So you think you've rolled me, but instead you've once again made a fool of yourself highlighting the fact that you can't read for ****.

    Point out where I said Fed served well against Murray. Go on I challenge you to do that. I said his serve IMPROVED after the first set and it did. I'm embarrassed for you because you can't read LOL.

    And Agassi's mileage was worse than Fed's because he was born with a debilitating condition and Federer wasn't. Not to mention the mileage argument is very weak to beign with.

    And believe me peak Fed would have won FAR less majors if peak Rafa showed up at the same time.

    But wasn't Roddick past his prime in 2007? So why is post prime Roddick performing better than prime Roddick? In 2004 he lost to Johansson. 2006 he was only competitive for 2 sets and got smashed in the other 2 and was only the 9th seed. So who is this mystical prime Roddick USO competitor that was going to deal with Novak from 07-2010? 2003? Where he got lucky Nalbandian choked? Face it, Roddick's prime ended when 2009 ended and therefore when he lost to Novak in 08 he was in his prime.

    Not as well as Novak at USO. In fact nowhere near it. And Novak dealt with Roddick when they actually did meet at the USO in 08.

    And in what way is this evidence that Roddick or Hewitt would've beat both of them in a row?

    LOL why you conveniently looking at 04-05 for Hewitt? His prime was from 2001 to 2006 which includes MANY early round exits and only 2 Masters shields.

    Roddick's prime was from 2003-early 2010 I don't care what anyone says. In that time Roddick was successful in winning 5 Masters shields. During 2007-2009, Novak eclipsed Roddick's entire career - 1 slam each, 5 Masters each, but Novak had a YEC as well.
  13. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Could the two of you get a room already. Good grief. It is too bad trolling and excessive ****ness wasnt a bannable offense.
  14. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    lol, read my edit, fed went from 10-5 in W/UE to 10-16 in W/UE (IIRC) it wasn't just minor mistakes, he started spraying it everywhere ...

    Like I said, rafa did pick it up after a slow start, he started playing well, but he wasn't exactly on fire ...

    jeez, clueless, wasn't that lob one primary example of out-grinding !?

    and the bold part again was just an example of what I was saying ...

    fed was going for a bit too much and missing ....

    yeah, I said he wasn't as determined as he was vs murray , doesn't mean he didn't fight at all vs novak/nadal , clueless ... I never said fed wouldn't lose a TB if he was determined either ... also yes, in the 2nd set, fed was clearly outplaying novak by junkballing him and had taken his rhythm off, but went back to baseline-bashing and gave novak the rhythm back ... he should've taken the second set ...

    LOL, bwahaha, you just got OWNED big time and are just changing your tune now because of it .....

    LOL, wut ? so his serving improved from very bad to bad ? that's supposed to mean that much ????? LOL, you're just trying to worm your way out here ...

    so you agree now that he didn't serve well ? well , he was getting over-powered by murray of the FH side FFS ... that's supposed to be pretty good ground game from him ? LOL !!!!!!! the one and only consolation was that his BH still held up well, that's it ...

    LOL, you even tried to troll by saying it was 'only' murray's play that lead to fed being defeated comprehensively @ olympics ... when I showed you that he had a well into the negative W to UE ratio , on grass, you just slunk away ...

    ditto for when you tried to troll by bringing in obviously wrong stats from the RG website about the 2008 final ..trying to 'prove' fed was playing decent there ....... :lol:

    I also edited the agassi part, read it ...

    he'd have cut into his major tally, but fed would've had the edge outside of clay prime to prime ....also his mental state vs rafa wouldn't be as bad as it got skewed by so many clay meetings, but less HC/grass meetings ...remember he cut down the rafa's lead in h2h from 1-6 to 6-8 ....

    also outside of clay, prime fed is quite a bit better than prime rafa vs the field, so yeah, fed would still be way ahead ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  15. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    The relevance is Murray gave Rafa more trouble than Hewitt ever did at RG.

    Sod beat Simon in straights in front of his home crowd (isn't that supposed to mean something considering you mention PHM :oops:) Yet for some reason he was playing crap? LOL Rafa made him look crap by raising his level.

    As for Andujar, did he win a set? I'm asking you did he WIN ONE?

    Rafa lost 3 sets in both but the quality of opponents was tougher in 2011 than2006.

    And how does this prove anything? He had more shots at Nadal at RG, it's no wonder he was able to take a set against 19 yr old Rafa while he was in his prime.

    Good for him, he got a couple wins. Did he play aggressively at Wimbledon from 05-08? He did in 09 but still didn't win it and Rafa didn't play 09 WIM so we don't know what his form would've been like. In 2010 - retirement did he play aggressively at WIM?

    That's because Hewitt was too **** to find a way to beat peak Fed, whereas 20 year old Novak did find a way to beat peak Fed.

    Murray wasn't established top 4 until late 08 after the USO.

    No you don't put their best years vs Novak and Murray's worst. You compare them at the same stages and then you look at who they had to beat. For example in Hewitt's and Roddick's first prime years (2001 & 2003 respectively) they didn't have to worry about a peak Federer and emerging Rafa like Novak did. Murray's first prime year (2008) he had to deal with prime Fed and peak Rafa and emerging Novak as well. In fact Hewitt had 3 prime years (2001-2003) where he didn't have to worry about peak Fed or Rafa. Can you seriously tell me in Novak's first 3 prime years (2007-2009) if he didn't have to deal with peak Fed and peak Rafa that he wouldn't be a multiple slam champion? He'd almost certainly have 07 USO, 08AO, 08RG & 08 USO.

    If you put Novak's best year it almost eclipses Hewitt and Roddick's entire career combined. Murray's best year 2012 was better than any year Roddick and Hewitt produced.

    And LOL at mentioning Rafa's injury as a reason they'd be top 4. Fwhahaha is that because you admit they're not good enough to break in with their SKILL as tennis players???
  16. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    LOL, I'm just having fun at his ridiculous statements .....when I get bored, I'll stop ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  17. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    no, he didn't clueless .... hewitt actually won 1 set in RG 2006 and his match vs rafa at RG 2010 was almost as competitive as murray @ RG 2011 ... and rafa was in better form in RG 2010 than he was in RG 2011

    yeah, home crowd can be a factor, but doesn't mean it always is ... it wasn't in the case of simon here ....

    sod was nowhere near the form he was in 2009 and 2010 in 2011 @ RG ...

    yeah, he didn't win a set, but the fact that rafa was down 1-5, 40-0 vs him doesn't show to you that rafa wasn't playing that well ? are you that clueless ?

    eh,no, that's plain cr*p ...

    he played well below par for his standards vs andujar ( only andujar wasn't good enough to take a set ), was also troubled by isner

    his scoreline vs an old ljubicic was almost similar to the one vs a younger one

    eh, he wouldn't be a certainty in 07 USO .... roddick played better in the QF than djoker did in any match in that tourney .... also if you take out peak fed/rafa, you atleast need to put in some other decent competition in ....

    eh, really ? he was good in the slams in 2012, but roddick did take in-form safin to 5 sets in AO 2004 , murray could've easily lost to him ...

    murray was benefited by a massive choke from cilic , only JJ completed the job vs roddick ...

    and roddick in wim 04 was better than murray in wim 12 ...

    murray didn't do that well in non-slam events in 2012 ....

    that was for only one of the 6 six years.. jeez ....
  18. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    What are you talking about? From 5-2 up Fed hit 10W, 5UE right? From 5-3 up he hit 2 UE, at 5-4 Fed hit 1 Winner so your "facts" are wrong already and he hit 3UE and for Rafa to break at 5-5 0 UE from Fed.

    Lol a lob isn't out grinding, out grinding is where you rally back and forth until someone misses. That lob was a brilliant display of determination and defense.

    And Fed went for it 3 times and missed WOW, yeah that's the reason he lost that TB. If Fed didn't go for it Rafa would've hit passing shots just like he did all night.

    Novak fought back and won it fair and square. suck it up. And you still can't give me a reason why he wasn't AS determined against Rafa and Novak as he was against Murray. Fed would be disgusted to read that his fans don't think he had just as much determination in important matches against his rivals.

    WTF you on about? LOL did you read my original post? I wrote a whole paragraph explaining that Haas and Baggy wouldn't get a set, you just can't read for ****. You're making a complete fool of yourself as usual.

    So, you still can't point out where I said Fed served well?

    Murray's FH has been developed by Lendl and has improved a lot. BH is part of ground game pal. Fed played a pretty good ground game.

    So your stats are right and the statisticians are wrong? Murray and Rafa didn't allow Fed any rhythm they blew him away.

    That only went to 6-8 because Rafa was inexperienced on grass in the 06 WIM final and the 07 WIM final the moment got to Nadal and he didn't play as well.

    Peak Rafa would've split wins with Fed at Wimbledon, but Rafa would've handled Fed at AO and RG. USO is the only one Fed would have the upper hand but I can also see Rafa beating him up there given the outdoor HC h2h is 5-2 in favor of Rafa.
  19. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    Was Roddick better in USO06 or USO07? Because in 07 he didn't get a set whereas in 06 he did.

    Was Hewitt better in WIM04 or 05?

    And Rafa wasn't in the form of 2010 RG either so what's your point?

    He lost concentration, Andujar picked up a bit of confidence, but when Rafa got serious he swiped him off.

    Ljubicic has always been **** on clay. In 06 though he almost won the third set at least.

    Sod who was the runner up the past 2 years was FAR greater threat than PHM. Murray played a tough competitive match against Rafa, more competitive than Hewitt 06 and Fed played better in RG11 than RG06.

    Who, past it Sampras? Pete was not at his best in that final, Novak 07 form would've beat him. As for Roddick, I think I've already established that Novak is a FAR better player than him, especially at the US Open.

    Murray won a major, got to the final of another and won Olympic gold medal. Tell me which year did Roddick or Hewitt overtake these achievements?

    So why mention it then? It's because you know they not good enough skill wise so they need Rafa to be injured to sneak in. LOL.
  20. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    I said he was 10-5 before the match turned around at 5-2 setpoint and he ended up at something like 10-16 ... he hit no winners after that in that set and committed like 10-11 UEs ( this is IIRC ) ... maybe slightly off by one or two points here and there ... but just shows how much fed messed up after that .....

    those are just examples, clueless ... just representative of what happened in the match ...

    lol and what happened to rafa vs djoker in wimbledon 2011 ? where was the fight ?

    I didn't say fed didn't fight at all vs djoker or nadal, just that he showed clearly more fight vs murray ...

    yeah, murray's FH has improved, but no way in hell would he be actually over-powering fed off that side if fed's FH was anywhere near clicking ....he wasn't moving close to how he was at his prime as well ... considering these 2, his BH being good is nowhere enough to account for a pretty good ground game

    in that particular case , yes .. clueless .. didn't I already post that 'winners' column in that RG 2008 match was actually the total no of points they won on their serves in that match ?

    lol, and fed played cr*p on both occasions . FACT ....

    the moment didn't get to nadal in wim 07 ..fed raised his level and took it ; in fact , if anything he choked massively when he was 2 points away from taking it in the 4th set breaker in the 08 final ...

    fed also beat him @ hamburg ....

    eh, no ,fed would have the edge at wimbledon and at the AO ... USO is a clearly bigger one ...

    also rafa wouldn't be making close to as many finals as fed did as he has more trouble with the rest of the field outside of clay than fed did ....

    the outdoor HC h2h is anomaly as I've said and stated the reasons for before ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  21. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    the latter in both cases ... so what ? it doesn't prove anything as far as murray/hewitt vs rafa on clay goes I said :

    "his match vs rafa at RG 2010 was almost as competitive as murray @ RG 2011 ... and rafa was in better form in RG 2010 than he was in RG 2011"

    eh, what ? the first set was close as well .....

    he was a point away from getting breadsticked in the 3rd ...vs andujar ....

    an in-form sod was more of a threat than PHM obviously, but sod wasn't in-form .....

    again, ljubicic has never been great on clay, but atleast he was better at his prime ... if rafa was playing better in RG 2011, how were the scorelines 'similar' when ljubicic was well past it in 2011 ?

    lol, what ? why don't you address how novak was a lock vs roddick in USO 2007 .. roddick played quite a bit better in the QF vs fed than novak did in any match at that USO ....

    novak is better @ the USO, more consistent, but he's not going to have it easy vs in-form roddick , he didn't when roddick actually turned it up a notch in sets 3 and 4 in their 2008 meeting after a horrid 1st set and a below par 2nd set ...

    if roddick plays anywhere near how well he played vs fed in the QF, he beats djoker in USO 2007 ....
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  22. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    No you don't RC. Go watch again. I just told you Fed hit a winner at 5-4.

    But the match was fairly close wasn't it? So how can you assume that's what cost Fed. As usual you have an excuse for every single loss in Federer's career.

    Rafa got outplayed.

    And you STILL can't explain why Fed wasn't as determined against Novak and Rafa as he was against Murray. I hope Fed doesn't read your posts he'd be bitterly disappointed to see his fans that he gives so much for turning on him and questioning his determination in huge matches with his rivals.

    Fed was moving quite well, that's bs excuse.

    I don't care what you post, Nadal only made 7 UE for the whole match and was in unbeatable form.

    Because he's not as good as you think. He seems to play crap a lot in important matches...

    Yes it did, Nadal admitted it in his book.

    Congrats on Fed finally getting a clay win against Nadal. Well deserved yeah it put him in great stead for RG...

    peak Fed struggled with pre prime Nadal at WIM. Against peak Nadal it's all over for the Swiss miss.

    AO is even worse, let's not forget Federer's abysmal 1-6 record against top 4 opponents at AO. Peak Rafa would be a nightmare for him.

    THe only anomaly is the amount of excuses you dribble out for your favorite ballerina. I like the way Nadal makes him dance around the court.
  23. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    BUt you said Hewitt 06RG was tougher than Murray because he won a set. Sorry to own you again but it is pretty funny :grin:

    Nadal being nice to his fellow Spaniard.

    Yes, you've said that already parrot. FACT Nadal didn't get breadsticked by Andujar, deal with it.

    Federer nearly got double bagelled at RG 08 final, but you don't see me cacking on about it over and over and over and over again do you?

    After dismissing French hopeful Simon comfortably, he was in decent form. Not only that but Rafa's form wasn't the best either. Still better than 06 though.

    Because old players can sometimes bring their best in certain matches! :lol:

    I love using ******* logic against *******s.

    I did address it, lol can't you read? I said Novak was a far superior player to Roddick so that obviously implies that I redkon he would've handled him.

    And no Roddick doesn't beat Djoker in 07 USO. In that 07 final Novak choked because of nerves, if not he would've taken sets off Fed. In fact Novak took 2 more games off Fed than super Roddick did.
  24. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    fine, will check when I have the time ... but the main point still stands ....

    because that's what happened ...

    where was his determination in that match ?

    because that's what happens ... you are more determined in some matches, not in the others ...see examples of RG 2011 and wim 07, wim 08 for when fed was highly determined vs novak/rafa ...

    lol, ha ha ha ....just goes to show you really haven't observed fed's movement at his prime ...not surprising ....

    its not thinking .... its a fact ...

    of course rafa was at his very best there, when did I deny that ? but equally important part of the lopsided scoreline was fed playing cr*p ....fed would've made the scoreline lot more competitive if he was anywhere near decent form ...

    yes, his book is the gospel ... we should take it for the truth ... we should also not pay any attention to a DF and missing a sitter BH in the 4th set breaker in wimbledon 2008 when he was 2 points away from the match , I get it .... :roll:

    he beat peak nadal at wim 07 .. deal with it ....

    3-1 vs top 4 in best 5 years @ the AO ....

    after 2009,2012 and 2010, all we have for rafa are blowouts - gonzo in AO 2007 , tsonga in AO 2008, ferrer in AO 2011 (injury) ...

    even in AO 2010, was clearly outplayed by murray ...

    LOL, ha ha ............

    bwhaha, the desperation ...:)
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  25. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    I also mentioned the RG 2010 match, ... but then you conveniently skipped that one as that crushes your argument ...:lol:

    I also mentioned how murray only reached the semi as troicki choked massively ...

    I also mentioned how hewitt atleast got a big win on clay - vs kuerten @ davis cup in 2001 ..

    but you just ignored those as you have absolutely no reply ....:lol:

    lol, ha ha ...

    eh, no, the first set was closer than the scoreline suggests ... federer was nowhere near being double bagelled ...

    no, it wasn't ...

    and that happened in that match, really ?

    of course, he did ... fed was quite a bit better in the QF than he was in the final ...but then you wouldn't know >> because you either don't watch or when you do, your observation skills being cr*p don't help you ....

    novak is a far superior player to roddick @ the AO and at RG, but not at wimbledon or the USO ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  26. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    Nah it doesn't. Rafa broke Fed at 5 all from his own play, not from getting a gift of errors by Fed. Watch again and then wipe the egg off your face.

    But how do you know that if Fed didn't go for his shots he would've lost even worse?

    He was as determined as always, he just had no answer, the better man won on the day.

    Yeah but we're not just talking about "some" matches here, we're talking about AO semi finals.

    I said he was moving quite well, didn't say he was moving like when he was in his peak.

    What thinking are you talking about? Rafa gave Fed hardly any free points but he certainly dished out the punishment. Nothing Fed could do.

    Well he knows how he felt better than you do.

    No he didn't, peak Nadal was 08 WIM. In case you don't know peak = highest point. His level was higher in 08.

    No, he is 1W - 6L.

    Yeah and before 2003 we have Fed blowouts at majors in the first round consecutively :oops:

    bwhaha, desperate for what?
  27. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    And you are conveniently switching stations. We were talking about 06 vs 11 form. You then made a **** weak point about Hewitt taking a set which I destroyed as usual and now you need to refer to another match but it's useless dribble because there is no telling how well Murray would've done against Rafa had they played at RG more than once.

    Troicki choked, that is not a knock on Murray, but a knock on Troicki so you don't have any point there either.

    Ok Hewitt had one big win on clay, so because of that 1 match he is clearly a bigger clay threat to Nadal? LOL.

    No, no definitely not. Especially considering the game Federer won he was down 15-40.... :oops: :lol:

    Yes. Now I believe you.

    Ljubicic turned back the clock in that one.

    Has Novak been knocked out in the first round of US Open since reaching top 4? Has Roddick made it to 3 US Open finals? Other than his 03 win and 06 final appearance has Roddick ever made it past the qtrs at USO?

    The answer to all 3 is NO. Novak is far superior to Roddick at US Open.

    As for Fed being better against Roddick than Novak, let me guess you looked at the W-UE stats and made that "observation". But you're far too stupid to realise Novak has FAR greater defense than Roddick which is why Fed gunned more W past Andy with fewer UE.
  28. Masayoshi

    Masayoshi Semi-Pro

    Jan 28, 2012
    Indeed, it's silly to make claims about the strength or weakness of an era based on how many slams people have won.

    Let's illustrate this point with a hypothetical and say that this era had 7 equally skilled people with 5 slams each, for a total of 35 slams over the last 7.5 years. Wow, what a strong era it must be, right? Let's look at a list of hypothetical players:

    A: 5 slams
    B: 5 slams
    C: 5 slams
    D: 5 slams
    E: 5 slams
    F: 5 slams
    G: 5 slams

    Well, what if one of those players, instead of just winning their 5 slams, instead won 17 slams? He raises his level and now the distribution is:

    A: 17 slams
    B: 3 slams
    C: 3 slams
    D: 3 slams
    E: 3 slams
    F: 3 slams
    G: 3 slams

    Still a strong era, right? Player A just kinda went nuts there, but B thru G played exactly the same as in the 1st scenario.

    Now what if player B won 11 slams, and player C won 6 slams. Well, then you'd have something like:

    A: 17 slams
    B: 11 slams
    C: 6 slams
    D: 1 slam
    E: 1 slam
    F: 0 slams
    G: 0 slams

    Players D, E, F,and G played exactly the same high level that would have earned a "wow this is a strong era", but players A, B, and C raised their game even more. Look familiar? Is it now a weak era because 3 players played even better than the already high level?

    Point is, it's virtually impossible to say whether someone's success is due to their extraordinarily high level of play or if it's due to the weakness of their opponents. The more a player succeeds, the more they will inevitably make their opposition look weaker. It is a circular argument and makes it virtually impossible to know the absolute strength of a player or his era.
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  29. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Aug 21, 2012
    Agreed. "Weak era" is the most meaningless term in Tennis.
  30. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    err, when did I switch anything... RG 2006 point was valid ... so was the RG 2010 one ... clueless !

    that shows murray wasn't as good as you are making him out to be - if he required a massive choke from troicki to get through to the semi ....

    I'm not basing it on one thing, , rather just that was one indicator ...hewitt's a bit better on clay, yeah any case, murray shouldn't be tough at all on clay for a good CC player if the good CC player is playing well ...there's no way he gets that many BPs vs rafa unless rafa is a bit below par .... which is what happened ...

    lol, he held in game 3, how was that close to be being bagelled ? not to forget fed had deuce in game 1 , had 2 BPs on the nadal serve in game 2 ...

    rafa had to stave off SPs after being down 5-1, 0-40 to avoid getting breadsticked ... how is the closeness to fed getting bagelled and rafa getting breadsticked comparable ? only in your delusional mind ...

    LOL, clueless I've watched both the matches ...fed was significantly better in the QF >> but you wouldn't know considering you are clueless ...

    just another tip, roddick's stats in the QF were significantly better than that of djoker's in the final as well ... go and actually watch the matches after getting your observation skills fixed ... then you'll realise ...

    roddick anywhere near the USO 2007 QF form would beat djoker of any match in USO 2007 ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  31. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    by normal standards, he was just moving decent ... compared to his prime, he was moving downright terrible ...

    the thinking that the stats on the RG 2008 site are downright wrong ...

    of course fed wouldn't win, but if playing decent, he could certainly make it much more competitive ...

    lol, so only one year for ****'s peak ? LOL ....

    3-1 in 5 best 5 AOs ... I'm sure a feverish nadal or nadal @ his 6th best AO or nadal at 29+ would love to play someone like a younger , fitter, better version of himself or djoker in absolute top form or murray in absolute top form, bwahaha :lol:

    oh wait, he couldn't even handle murray @ AO 2010 , when playing well ....
    not to forget getting absolutely demolished by tsonga in AO 2008, two and half years after he won his first slam ...getting demolished by gonzo in AO 2007 a year and half after he won his first slam ...

    your boy nadal is 4-5 vs top 10 opponents at the AO

    federer is 13-7 vs top 10 opponents

    oops !

    none since he hit his prime ....and he lost in hard fought matches vs nalby and haas in the years previous to winning it ...

    and given his injuries and style of play, nadal's not going to stay at a high level close to how fed is now ...

    desperation to having to retort to trying to incite me because you were getting owned big time ... :lol:
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  32. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Jun 12, 2012
    Funny, Hewitt said he couldn't find any real decline in Fed's game. He said the FH became suspect but only against defenders like Rafa, Novak and Murray and Courier agreed. You'd think if the difference was down right terrible they'd have noticed...

    But Nadal didn't allow him to play decent, he was just far too good.

    It was enough to beat woger's peak. Tell me when in Fed's wildest dreams would he knock Nadal off at RG? Nadal knocked him off his high horse at WIM.

    Still got that crystal ball huh? We'll just wait and see how Rafa plays when he's 29...

    Yet somehow this crap player is UNDEFEATED against your hero at AO LOL! Most of Fed's wins against top 10 are from that **** weak era anyway. Rafa is 2-1 vs top 4 at AO. Almost 3-0.

    Yet he has lost in the first round of his favorite major three times! :oops:

    You keep telling yourself that.

    LOL what? I've absolutely destroyed ALL of your **** weak arguments. Nobody apart from rabid *******s thinks the era from 04-07 was as tough as 08-present.
  33. abmk

    abmk Talk Tennis Guru

    Dec 9, 2008
    lol, wut ? at his prime, rarely did his FH break down, even vs rafa ... it was only after his movement to the right declined by quite a bit that players started going to his FH wing more ....

    again, it wasn't just the errors he was making off that side, that can happen when slightly off or being pressed by any player ; it was the fact that he was getting over-powered by murray off that wing ... it had wayyy too less power/pop than at his prime .... part of the problem was that his movement has gone down too much, especially to the right ...

    I didn't hear hewitt's/courier's comments, so I'm not going to comment on them right now ...

    lol, how thick are you ? nadal was playing brilliant, doesn't mean it was the only reason why federer didn't play well ... on his own, he played terrible ... that was made worse by rafa's brilliant play ...

    he was fairly inconsistent @ that RG and played his worst match in the final

    lol, wut ? fed was better at 6 other Wimbledons (2003-07 and 2009 ) how exactly is 2008 his peak going by your "logic" ? ha ha ha .....

    we've already seen plenty of indications - injuries, missing slams etc etc ...AO 2006, AO 2013, wimbledon 2009, USO 2012 (&AO 2011)

    yeah, all with fed not close to his best, not at 5 of his best AOs .... I never said that rafa was anywhere near cr*p ...just that fed at his peak is quite a bit better there and overall his record there is significantly better than rafa's

    rafa is 2-2 vs top 4 at the AO and all of them in his best 3 years there ( 2009,10,12)

    4-5 vs top 10 compared to 13-7 for fed ... deal with it ...

    none of them at his prime, your boy lost in 2R to rosol at his prime on his 2nd best surface ...

    lol, ha ha ha ....

    2004-2007 & 2008-10 aren't that different, fields are similar, only fed's decline being compensated by rafa getting better ...

    only you have your own delusions thinking ferrero wasn't playing well in AO 2004, hewitt was only competitive for a set in AO 2004 , muzza wasn't well below par in AO 2011 (he was struggling vs dolgopolov and ferrer - ferrer played 2 terrible TBs which was significant part of why murray won that match and was awful in the final ) ... ferrer of AO 2013 was close to roddick of AO 2007 .... agassi was anywhere near being affected by 'injury' @ USO 2004 (or even AO 2005 ),( whereas in reality, he was playing pretty well at both) ( even more so at the USO ) )

    LOL, ha ha ha ..........:lol:

    murray didn't do much after 2 sets and a bit in the final vs djoker in 2012 just like baghdatis in AO 2006 ...same for safin in AO 2004

    2011 onwards is a bit diferent 'mainly' because of djoker ...(esp 2011 ) but then after top 4, the field is quite a bit weaker than it was before and surfaces being slower than before is part of reason for more consistency of the top 4 ...

    also past his prime fed dealt better with novak than your boy nadal did in 2011 - beat him @ RG and had MPs vs at the USO ...your boy rafa couldn't touch djoker @ wimbledon or USO beat twice in straights on clay ....:)

    he had to wait for djoker's level to come down at the AO in 2012 and still could've lost to him in 4 sets had djoker not missed that FH sitter at the net at 5-3 in the breaker , he'd have had 3 MPs & that was an easier shot to make than the much talked about missed rafa BH passing attempt in the 5th set ...
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013

    THE FIGHTER Hall of Fame

    Jan 23, 2013
    federer would have 25 slams minimum.
  35. SLD76

    SLD76 G.O.A.T.

    Aug 31, 2009
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
  36. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Oct 26, 2009
    No. Federer's decline on the forehand wing was simultaneous with his movement declining. Many times Federer was out of position, off balance, going for shots that weren't on. On any shot, be it the serve, the forehand, the backhand, volleys etc, everything starts with the footwork, if your footwork and prep are off then you're bound to make shanks - and let's not forget Federer hits with a lot of spin (which also increases the chances of mishitting/framing).

    At times his forehand was just plain crap in 2008, missing shots he'd make in his sleep.

    Actually, I'm not a rabid '*******', yet I actually believe 04-07 to be slightly tougher. Firstly, Federer' level was higher then than it is now. The fact that Federer can take Murray to 5 sets, win Wimbledon and occasionally Bagel Djokovic at Cincinnati, make olympic finals playing good tennis at best is enough proof that when he was in his prime he would be able to destroy anoyone if he wanted to (except for Nadal who was/is just a tough match up)

    Secondly, has no one actually seen the field outside of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Tipsarevic? Ferrer? Berdych? Tsonga? Isner? Didn't Karlovic nearly make the top 10 in 2008? Simon? Monfils made the top 10 winning a grand total of 1 title in 2009. The only other guy was JMDP who was a non fixture since winning his only slam title - even then, what has he won outside his US Open?

    You had more champions and proven players in 05 ish; Federer, Nadal, Agassi, Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero (although he was more 2002/03) and the others consisted of Blake, Nalbandian, Coria, Gaudio (his career does look like JMDP's), Pim-pim.

    I'm going to keep Federer and Nadal out of this beause they've been #1 and #2 in both era's, the only guy who is a better match player to every other player from that last list is Djokovic - and even then I hold Safin more technically gifted than Djokovic and any other player in general (although mentally he was often almost ********).

Share This Page