I thought Hewitt would dominate tennis after the 2002 Wimbledon

skypadq

Hall of Fame
this guy has total talent
hewitt was born 1981 same as federer
he wins first tournament at 1998 adelaide open
can you belive it ? 1998 jan
hewitt was only 16 years old
and he beat agassi at that tournament

and then , in 2000 he won adelaide open , sydney open , tennis channel open , queens club
in 2001 , he won sydeny open , queens club , rosmalen open , us open , japen open , atp final
in 2002 , he won pacific cost open , indian wells , queens club , wimbledon , atp final

in 3 year span , he won two majors , two atp finals , 15 titles
total domitated
it 's shame that he didn't won more major
like 2001 WIMBLEDON , 2002 AO , 2003 AO ...
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Hewitt................ dominate?

fPe0laM.gif
 
this guy has total talent
hewitt was born 1981 same as federer
he wins first tournament at 1998 adelaide open
can you belive it ? 1998 jan
hewitt was only 16 years old
and he beat agassi at that tournament

and then , in 2000 he won adelaide open , sydney open , tennis channel open , queens club
in 2001 , he won sydeny open , queens club , rosmalen open , us open , japen open , atp final
in 2002 , he won pacific cost open , indian wells , queens club , wimbledon , atp final

in 3 year span , he won two majors , two atp finals , 15 titles
total domitated
it 's shame that he didn't won more major
like 2001 WIMBLEDON , 2002 AO , 2003 AO ...

The Spectre of injury is definitely a factor for Hewitt. He paid dearly for the massive amount of very physical matches he played early on in his career while his body was very much still maturing.

As for it being a shame that Hewitt didn't win more majors - couldn't agree more.

There haven't been many better defensive counterpunchers. If he'd played in any other era with slightly faster courts, and slightly shorter average height, Hewitt would be a 5+ major winner at minimum.

Underrated serve for his height, and a brilliant volleyer.
 

Indio

Semi-Pro
In 2002 Miami he got officially figured out by Federer.

The end.
Federer won Miami, but Hewitt won the next three matches: Paris 02, Masters Cup 02, and Davis Cup 03, to stretch his record against Federer to 7-2. Federer didn't figure Hewitt out until 2004, after he abandoned serving and volleying. Hewitt dominated S&Vers, going a combined 15-3 against Rafter, Philippoussis and Henman, and 5-4 against Sampras.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Federer won Miami, but Hewitt won the next three matches: Paris 02, Masters Cup 02, and Davis Cup 03, to stretch his record against Federer to 7-2. Federer didn't figure Hewitt out until 2004, after he abandoned serving and volleying. Hewitt dominated S&Vers, going a combined 15-3 against Rafter, Philippoussis and Henman, and 5-4 against Sampras.

Fed annihilated Hewitt in that Miami match and even if Hewitt won a few more it was the beginning of the end for him. I remember Hewitt looked unbeatable up until then and I was wondering how anyone could do anything against him, then Fed showed there was a totally different level. He played all court in Miami not just s&v.
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
He was a great talent. Hampered by injury, but he was the youngest ever no.1, beat Agassi at a 250 tournament at the age of 17(from my memory), and looked set to dominate men's tour back in the days. However, his size probably was his limit.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
He was a great talent. Hampered by injury, but he was the youngest ever no.1, beat Agassi at a 250 tournament at the age of 17(from my memory), and looked set to dominate men's tour back in the days. However, his size probably was his limit.

16 but close ;)
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
He was #1 the entire year in 02

Yeah, but look at Hewitt's 2001-2002:

2001: Majors: AO: 3R, French: QF, Wimbledon: 4R, U.S. Open: W; WTF: W; Masters: No titles, no finals​
2002: Majors: AO: 1R; French: 4R; Wimbledon: W; U.S. Open: SF; WTF: W; Masters: 1 title; 2 other finals​

I'd be hard pressed to call that domination.
 

Heuristic

Hall of Fame
Yeah, but look at Hewitt's 2001-2002:

2001: Majors: AO: 3R, French: QF, Wimbledon: 4R, U.S. Open: W; WTF: W; Masters: No titles, no finals​
2002: Majors: AO: 1R; French: 4R; Wimbledon: W; U.S. Open: SF; WTF: W; Masters: 1 title; 2 other finals​

I'd be hard pressed to call that domination.

He was sick/injured in 2001s AU and Wimbledons.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
Fed annihilated Hewitt in that Miami match and even if Hewitt won a few more it was the beginning of the end for him. I remember Hewitt looked unbeatable up until then and I was wondering how anyone could do anything against him, then Fed showed there was a totally different level. He played all court in Miami not just s&v.

I wouldn't say Federer annihilated Hewitt in that Miami match. It was 6-3, 6-4, with one break in each set and Hewitt going 0/3 on break points. And sure, Federer had other chances to break, but I wouldn't call a match with one break per set an annihilation. Plus, as noted, Hewitt won their next three matches, including a 6-4, 6-4 win in their next match in Paris.
 

Heuristic

Hall of Fame
I wouldn't say Federer annihilated Hewitt in that Miami match. It was 6-3, 6-4, with one break in each set and Hewitt going 0/3 on break points. And sure, Federer had other chances to break, but I wouldn't call a match with one break per set an annihilation. Plus, as noted, Hewitt won their next three matches, including a 6-4, 6-4 win in their next match in Paris.

Of course later he didn't belong on the same court as Roger... Hewitt attributes it to the BH of Federer.. Once a liability, now a weapon, and no place to go to anymore.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
He was sick/injured in 2001s AU and Wimbledons.

I don't see how that changes the question of whether he dominated. He won 1 Major and WTF each year, was pretty mediocre at the other 6 Majors held in those years, and won 1 Masters title both years combined. Maybe if he were healthier he could have dominated, but Hewitt clearly didn't dominate in 2001-2002, even though he was the best player.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
Of course later he didn't belong on the same court as Roger... Hewitt attributes it to the BH of Federer.. Once a liability, now a weapon, and no place to go to anymore.

No doubt. I'm just saying that I don't think Miami 2002 was the turning point.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Hewitt didn't dominate 01-02 although he dominated his biggest rivals for the most part. He was only 20-21 at the time so had some growing to do, imo 04-05 Hewitt would have dominated that period to a degree - barring injuries.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
Hewitt didn't dominate 01-02 although he dominated his biggest rivals for the most part. He was only 20-21 at the time so had some growing to do, imo 04-05 Hewitt would have dominated that period to a degree - barring injuries.

I don't know that he dominated his biggest rivals:

3-2 against Agassi, but Agassi won their only match at a Major (2002 U.S. Open SF)​
3-2 against Safin​
2-1 against Ferrero, but Ferrero won their only match at a Major (2001 French Open QF)​
1-0 against Kuerten​

Those are solid numbers, but I wouldn't call them domination, and he lost the 2 biggest matches.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I don't know that he dominated his biggest rivals:

3-2 against Agassi, but Agassi won their only match at a Major (2002 U.S. Open SF)​
3-2 against Safin​
2-1 against Ferrero, but Ferrero won their only match at a Major (2001 French Open QF)​
1-0 against Kuerten​

Those are solid numbers, but I wouldn't call them domination, and he lost the 2 biggest matches.

Winning records over all of them though, also dominated Sampras.

I definitely don't think the FO QF vs Ferrero was a bigger match than their YEC final either btw.

The USO SF vs Agassi loss is the biggest, Hewitt probably should have won that but uncharacteristically lost it mentally.

The one guy he really struggled with in that period was Moya.
 
It was really one of the weakest eras ever. Sampras and Rafter at the end of their road, Agassi slowed down by injuries, Kuerten clay court specialist also often injured, Safin after 2000 never had the same drive and dedication, I mean Johansson, Costa, Ferrero winning slams those years, effing Verkerk playing GS final is the testament of the "quality" of that era. Put someone like Peak Thiem right there and he probably wins the CYGS one of those years. ;)
 

RS

Bionic Poster
It was really one of the weakest eras ever. Sampras and Rafter at the end of their road, Agassi slowed down by injuries, Kuerten clay court specialist also often injured, Safin after 2000 never had the same drive and dedication, I mean Johansson, Costa, Ferrero winning slams those years, effing Verkerk playing GS final is the testament of the "quality" of that era. Put someone like Peak Thiem right there and he probably wins the CYGS one of those years. ;)
2017 and 2018 were better years lol.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
The one guy he really struggled with in that period was Moya.

Wow, 1-5 against Moya, losing at the Australian Open (2001) and WTF (2002). Weird, given that he was otherwise 7-0 against him. I'm guessing that Moya's big forehand gave him a lot of problems, but I don't really remember their matches from that period.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
I wouldn't say Federer annihilated Hewitt in that Miami match. It was 6-3, 6-4, with one break in each set and Hewitt going 0/3 on break points. And sure, Federer had other chances to break, but I wouldn't call a match with one break per set an annihilation. Plus, as noted, Hewitt won their next three matches, including a 6-4, 6-4 win in their next match in Paris.

Did you actually see the match or did you just look up some numbers? I saw it live and it was a masterclass by Fed. There was nothing Hewitt could do.
 

UnderratedSlam

G.O.A.T.
Before the modern era it was not uncommon for teens to do very well.

Hewitt didn't win a slam as a teen though. Many others did.

Hewitt was never super-talented, he was a hard worker with a great attitude, more like early Courier than Sampras, much more.

Kuerten should have dominated more, but an injury screwed him over. Ferrero should have done better, but he lost interest. Safin should have been much better, but he was lobotomized early.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Wow, 1-5 against Moya, losing at the Australian Open (2001) and WTF (2002). Weird, given that he was otherwise 7-0 against him. I'm guessing that Moya's big forehand gave him a lot of problems, but I don't really remember their matches from that period.

Weird match-up, he did well enough against Ferrero who was a similar mold of player - perhaps slightly weaker forehand but better backhand.
 
Hewitt didn't dominate 01-02 although he dominated his biggest rivals for the most part. He was only 20-21 at the time so had some growing to do, imo 04-05 Hewitt would have dominated that period to a degree - barring injuries.

Hewitt never had the style of game that would outright "dominate". To dominate you need some kind of huge weapon that isn't just speed and mental toughness. Even Nadal and Djokovic who people label as defensive players have that, Nadal the forehand bigtime, Djokovic the backhand and possibly some other shots. He did not have that. Even 04-05 Hewitt put into 01-02 does not outright dominate. It just never happens. He would always be vurnerable to upsets by a hot lower ranked player, in addition to being always challengable by his main rivals. Plus the French is a complete no go for him, almost as much as Roddick, so he is working out of only 3 slams per year to start with. Australia is close to a total no go for him too given his career history there, probably since the courts were too slow for him. 2005 is the only year ever he really contended there.
 

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
Not me. He was a sampras killer. First players to handle petes low skidders. Felt none of those players during that time would dominate. Fed was a bit of a surprise to me in 2004.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Hewitt never had the style of game that would outright "dominate". To dominate you need some kind of huge weapon that isn't just speed and mental toughness. Even Nadal and Djokovic who people label as defensive players have that, Nadal the forehand bigtime, Djokovic the backhand and possibly some other shots. He did not have that. Even 04-05 Hewitt put into 01-02 does not outright dominate. It just never happens. He would always be vurnerable to upsets by a hot lower ranked player, in addition to being always challengable by his main rivals. Plus the French is a complete no go for him, almost as much as Roddick, so he is working out of only 3 slams per year to start with. Australia is close to a total no go for him too given his career history there, probably since the courts were too slow for him. 2005 is the only year ever he really contended there.

Hewitt in 04-05 was winning something like 90% of his HC/grass matches outside of Federer so yeah I think he could rack up some good numbers in 01-02.
 
Hewitt in 04-05 was winning something like 90% of his HC/grass matches outside of Federer so yeah I think he could rack up some good numbers in 01-02.

Well some of that is because he kept getting unlucky to draw Federer, often as early as round of 16 or quarters, almost always before finals, he was often being kept away from meeting other players he also might have lost to. For instance he lost to Federer in 5 slams in 2004-2005 but no way do I believe he was winning all 5 of those slams had he not played Federer. The exact number is a guess, but it isn't 5.

Also while 2004-2005 was overall stronger than 2001-2002 due to Federer, Hewitt, and Roddick, I do for sure believe 2001-2002 had a lot more depth overall and higher number of dangerous players and semi contenders or floaters overall.

While I do agree with the premise 2004-2005 could have been Hewitt's true peak and nobody realizes it just due to Federer blocking him, in no way do I buy into a theory he was way better in 2004-2005 than 2001-2002 either. Especialy not when he was often beating a near prime Agassi in 2001-2002 and lost to an older weaker Agassi in their only meeting in 2004-2005, and was having a hellish time with Nalbandian when they played in 2004-2005 when he walloped Nalbandian in the 2002 Wimbledon final, amongst other signs.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Well some of that is because he kept getting unlucky to draw Federer, often as early as round of 16 or quarters, almost always before finals, he was often being kept away from meeting other players he also might have lost to. For instance he lost to Federer in 5 slams in 2004-2005 but no way do I believe he was winning all 5 of those slams had he not played Federer. The exact number is a guess, but it isn't 5.

Never said he wins 5 but probably a bunch of finals and wins some. His record against the other top players in those years was good as well btw.

Besides I said 2004-2005 Hewitt in 2001-2002, he'd have decent to great chances at the Wimby, the AO and USO in both years. Probably wins 3-4 imo.
 
Never said he wins 5 but probably a bunch of finals and wins some. His record against the other top players in those years was good as well btw.

Besides I said 2004-2005 Hewitt in 2001-2002, he'd have decent to great chances at the Wimby, the AO and USO in both years. Probably wins 3-4 imo.

It is all speculation at the end of the day. I just can't think of a player like Hewitt who lacked a single true kill shot ever being truly "dominant" though.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
Yeah, but look at Hewitt's 2001-2002:

2001: Majors: AO: 3R, French: QF, Wimbledon: 4R, U.S. Open: W; WTF: W; Masters: No titles, no finals​
2002: Majors: AO: 1R; French: 4R; Wimbledon: W; U.S. Open: SF; WTF: W; Masters: 1 title; 2 other finals​

I'd be hard pressed to call that domination.
Especially in light of what followed
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
It is all speculation at the end of the day. I just can't think of a player like Hewitt who lacked a single true kill shot ever being truly "dominant" though.

Never said he'd be truly dominant, just that he'd be somewhat dominant in that very specific period (y)
Also sometimes the whole is greater than the some of its parts. Hewitt didn't have a kill shot but he was a great ball striker with good shots off both wings, he had a top class return, was an excellent mover, underrated server and a strong volleyer.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
Did you actually see the match or did you just look up some numbers? I saw it live and it was a masterclass by Fed. There was nothing Hewitt could do.

I did see it back in the day, and it was a very nice win for Federer, but again, it was a 1 break per set match, and Hewitt failed to convert any of his 3 break points. And then this was their next match:
 

killerboss

Professional
His hype had died down as early as around 2004 (despite some good runs) and it was all about Federer vs Roddick and then not that much later Federer vs Nadal.
 

WhiskeyEE

G.O.A.T.
Hewitt was a special talent in the pre-poly era. Even when everyone else switched to poly in 2002, he still played with gut. At least for a while.

He was the best at playing his style with natural gut. Then others were better at doing it with poly and that messed up his career.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
I did see it back in the day, and it was a very nice win for Federer, but again, it was a 1 break per set match, and Hewitt failed to convert any of his 3 break points. And then this was their next match:

Yeah he got a few more wins but his aura of invincibility was gone and Fed dominated him there for the rest of his career. Fed straight up owned Hewitt in that Miami match and showed the tour what was possible against him if you take the ball early, attack and play with variety.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
Yeah he got a few more wins but his aura of invincibility was gone and Fed dominated him there for the rest of his career. Fed straight up owned Hewitt in that Miami match and showed the tour what was possible against him if you take the ball early, attack and play with variety.

But I don't think Hewitt had an aura of invincibility before that match. Two matches before that Miami match, Federer beat Hewitt in Basel, and their other 2 pre-Miami matches were Hewitt three set wins.
 
But I don't think Hewitt had an aura of invincibility before that match. Two matches before that Miami match, Federer beat Hewitt in Basel, and their other 2 pre-Miami matches were Hewitt three set wins.

Yeah I would say examples of players aura of invincibility being shattered would be Federer's shattered when Djokovic easily beat him in Australia in 08, Nadal destroyed him at French 08, and Nadal beat him at Wimbledon 08 (even knowing he had mono, this still didn't change players never looking at him quite the same ever again). Or Graf's aura shattered when she lost to Seles twice in clay finals, including the French Open final in 90, and then especialy when she lost in big matches on her best surfaces at Wimbledon to Zina Garrison and U.S Open to her slam pigeon Sabatini. Even those times she returned to dominance like late 93-early 94 and 95-96 top 10 players were never beaten before coming onto court the way they used to be. Or Sampras's aura probably shattered when he lost to Korda at the 97 U.S Open and Kucera at the 98 Australian Open, back to back huge upset losses in non PR slams for the first time in awhile, and his dominance (even if it was never Federer or Graf level dominance) would never be truly restored. Or Seles's aura shattered for good (had been briefly resorted to the field upon her post stabbing return, minus Graf) when she lost to the fast courter Novotna on clay at Roland Garros, and to Studenikova at Wimbledon. Top players, even the owns she still owned like Sanchez or Martinez, never truly feared her the same way ever again, and that would make the remainder of her career harder, in addition to the many other obstacles she was already facing. Or Nadal's aura of fear, particularly to his biggest rivals Federer, Djokovic, and Murray, which peaked in 2008-2010 even during his brief late 09 slump, was punctured for good with his string of losses to Djokovic, particularly the 2 close hard court losses, followed by the 2 straight set losses on clay. His aura, particularly when facing Djokovic, would never be the same again.

Hewitt didn't really have enough of an aura, particularly to more naturally talented players like Safin or Federer, for it to ever be truly shattered to begin with. Now when Federer thumped Hewitt badly in the 04 U.S Open final I think that was the end of Hewitt's belief he could ever beat Federer again for the first time ever. I think had that match not happened he might have won their 05 U.S Open semi final where he had lots of chances and Federer was badly subpar for him that day.
 
Last edited:

Mainad

Bionic Poster
But I don't think Hewitt had an aura of invincibility before that match. Two matches before that Miami match, Federer beat Hewitt in Basel, and their other 2 pre-Miami matches were Hewitt three set wins.

Post prime, injury-stricken Hewitt re-established his dominance when he beat peak Federer in the final of 2010 Halle (Fed's most successful event along with Basel).
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Yeah I would say examples of players aura of invincibility being shattered would be Federer's shattered when Djokovic easily beat him in Australia in 08, Nadal destroyed him at French 08, and Nadal beat him at Wimbledon 08 (even knowing he had mono, this still didn't change players never looking at him quite the same ever again). Or Graf's aura shattered when she lost to Seles twice in clay finals, including the French Open final in 90, and then especialy when she lost in big matches on her best surfaces at Wimbledon to Zina Garrison and U.S Open to her slam pigeon Sabatini. Even those times she returned to dominance like late 93-early 94 and 95-96 top 10 players were never beaten before coming onto court the way they used to be. Or Sampras's aura probably shattered when he lost to Korda at the 97 U.S Open and Kucera at the 98 Australian Open, back to back huge upset losses in non PR slams for the first time in awhile, and his dominance (even if it was never Federer or Graf level dominance) would never be truly restored. Or Seles's aura shattered for good (had been briefly resorted to the field upon her post stabbing return, minus Graf) when she lost to the fast courter Novotna on clay at Roland Garros, and to Studenikova at Wimbledon. Top players, even the owns she still owned like Sanchez or Martinez, never truly feared her the same way ever again, and that would make the remainder of her career harder, in addition to the many other obstacles she was already facing. Or Nadal's aura of fear, particularly to his biggest rivals Federer, Djokovic, and Murray, which peaked in 2008-2010 even during his brief late 09 slump, was punctured for good with his string of losses to Djokovic, particularly the 2 close hard court losses, followed by the 2 straight set losses on clay. His aura, particularly when facing Djokovic, would never be the same again.

Hewitt didn't really have enough of an aura, particularly to more naturally talented players like Safin or Federer, for it to ever be truly shattered to begin with. Now when Federer thumped Hewitt badly in the 04 U.S Open final I think that was the end of Hewitt's belief he could ever beat Federer again for the first time ever. I think had that match not happened he might have won their 05 U.S Open semi final where he had lots of chances and Federer was badly subpar for him that day.

Don't think Fed was particularly subpar that day...he was excellent on the big points otherwise it would have gone five probably.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
When I first saw Hewitt, I said he'd win 10 majors. At 16-17 years old, he was already mentally ready. Even when Hewitt won Wimbledon in 2002, I thought it was the first of about 4 Wimbledon titles for him. As regards to the conversation above regarding Hewitt vs. Federer in 2002-2004, it should also be pointed out that Hewitt's 7-5, 5-7, 7-5 win over Federer at the 2002 YEC was almost a much more comfortable 7-5, 6-4 victory, as Hewitt had multiple match points in the 10th game of the 2nd set.
 
Top