War Safin!
Professional
....in a Slam, ever?
Who, in your opinion, performed the biggest, crushing service-session in a slam?
Who, in your opinion, performed the biggest, crushing service-session in a slam?
Okay....it must have taken you a long time to come up with the words 'Pete' and 'Sampras' for such an answer....so care to elaborate on your wonder-post?pete sampras
Which match though?Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).
Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).
Ivanisevic vs Roddick, Wimbledon 2001. Nothing can be compared to thatWhich match though?
Which match stands out where you went, 'this guys serve is ON'?
I'd have to say Sampras - Agassi, Wimbledon final '99....
Which match though?
Which match stands out where you went, 'this guys serve is ON'?
I'd have to say Sampras - Agassi, Wimbledon final '99....
Ivanisevic vs Roddick, Wimbledon 2001. Nothing can be compared to that
You could also try Karlovic vs. Bracciali, 1st round Wimbledon 2005 (was it 2005?), The total ace count in that match was 85, I think
Mark Phillipousis, came oh so close to taking out sampras at wimbledon
yeah all Goran had was his serve, everything else was mediocre :roll:
watch this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=F9Cx0zj5Dzk and eat your words.
Ivanisevic vs Roddick, Wimbledon 2001. Nothing can be compared to that
Pretty much. Roddick couldn't do anything. He looked like a deer caught in headlights.
His best results early in his career were on clay, as he got better he concentrated more on Wimbledon & got a bit careless with other aspects of his game & concentrated more on his serve. If you only watched him on grass, you may think the rest of his game was bad(since there weren't a lot of rallies back then) & when you have a serve like that, why exert yourself on return games? just swing away & only try when you get to 30-all or something.
But the rest of his game was not mediocre, he reached 3 FO QF, finalist of Hamburg(slowest of clay events), finalist of Rome, bronze medalist at '92 Barcelona Olympics.
He certainly didn't do all that with just a serve, he was no Roddick(compare their backhands, its not even close, Goran could step in & hit winners with that shot-ask Sampras or Becker, while Roddick's is pretty much a joke)
he is part of one of the alltime best points:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BqXWog14KzY
1. Sampras
2. Edberg
3. Courier
4. Becker
5. Ivanisevic
6. Stich
7. Lendl
8. Agassi
9. Krajicek
10. Medvedev
11. Korda
12. Chang
13. Ferreira
14. Washington
15. Novacek
16. Muster
He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).
No.... I did not just follow him at Wimbledon... I followed him on hard courts and clay as well. I stand by my statment about him being mediocre in comparison to the other seeds. Pray tell which of those seeds Ivanisevic would be beating on a regular basis without his serve?Those "idiotic" highlights are worth as much as idiotic vids of Goran serving. You're not the only one who followed Ivanisevic. Yet it seems you only followed him at Wimbledon whereas other posters in this thread followed him on other surfaces as well. We followed him enough to know he didn't have a mediocre game, serve excluded. I'd like to see Roddick reach the final at Hamburg or Rome.
Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).
Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).
Goran Ivanisevic at Wimbledon - nobody else comes close. He won wimbledon essentially based on his serve (all of his other shots were mediocre - poor when compared with the other seeds).
Sampras, Krajicek, Rusedski, etc never even came close to the number of unreturned serves (or aces for that matter) Ivanisevic had. He is the greatest server of all time (assuming we ignore the rest of the game).
What about those accomplishments? Is that supposed to suddenly propel him past mediocrity when compared with the rest of the seeds?
I stand by this statement. Take away his serve, and Ivanisevic would've lost almost every time to the the majority of the seeds on that list.
Aside from possibly (not definitely.. only possibly) Korda, Washington, and Novacek - every other player there has a better ground game than Ivanisevic.
Goran made it to the final of Rome in 93 taking a set off Courier after beating Rosset and Sampras. He also made it to the final of Hamburg in 95 beating Rosset and Bruguera.
I'd still like to see Roddick reach the final at Hamburg or Rome. If all Goran had was his serve and Roddick's serve is faster than Goran's, why does Roddick constantly lose on clay against pros like Andreev and Chela? Goran made it to the final of Rome in 93 taking a set off Courier after beating Rosset and Sampras. He also made it to the final of Hamburg in 95 beating Rosset and Bruguera. Goran beating Bruguera (French Open winner in 93 and 94) on clay in 95 is like beating Nadal on clay today. Again, if Roddick's serve is faster and his opponents weaker, why isn't he making it when Goran "mediocre game, slower serve" did?
Err... when did I mention Roddick anywhere in my posts? Roddick is utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
Why Roddick cannot succeed on clay is a separate discussion in its entirety. There are ten thousand variables to consider such as whether his serve is actually potent on clay, whether his groundstokes are poor or mediocre, mental toughness, consistency, etc.
Why Roddick cannot succeed as much as Ivanisevic on clay has absolutely nothing to do with whether his strokes were mediocre in comparison to the other seeds.
And comparing Nadal to Brugera is horrendous.. Nadal is far, far superior and far more consistent in his domination of clay.
Yes. When player A does well on all surfaces & player B doesn't, its a strong argument that player A is more versatile.
Take away Mac or Sampras' serve & they would be pretty average as well & lose to a lot of lesser players. I think its pretty silly when I hear the "take away the serve" argument(which is very common here), since its kinda an important part of the game. I've never seen(or played) a match without serving, so I can't even begin to imagine these 'hypothetical matches' you describe.
I never called his game weak.. please read my post again. I said you *might possibly* be able to argue that Ivanisevic's ground game was better than Korda.that you think that Korda's ground game is weak among that list of seeds shows you may not have the best recollection of players from the 90s. Korda could(& did) blow away many great players strictly from the baseline, he was not a big server or attacking player at all. going by 'ground games' alone I think Korda is top 3 or 4 of those players listed. since you're way off on assessing korda, maybe your memory is a little fuzzy on Goran as well?
Goran is the only player to break Sampras twice in a Wimbledon final(Sampras was only broken 4 times total in 7 Wimbledons, he was virtually unbreakable in W finals), which shows how talented he was. Its not like Sampras just gave those games away by doubling or missing 1st serves either. Goran was more dangerous on returns than Roddick can dream of.
In terms of accomplishments, yes. Gamewise, they were/are on the top of their claycourt game. Beating Brugera may not be as big as beating Nadal, but it was as high of an accomplishment that Goran could have had given the depth of the clay court field then.
Take away Mac or Sampras' serve & they would be pretty average as well & lose to a lot of lesser players.
that you think that Korda's ground game is weak among that list of seeds shows you may not have the best recollection of players from the 90s. Korda could(& did) blow away many great players strictly from the baseline, he was not a big server or attacking player at all. going by 'ground games' alone I think Korda is top 3 or 4 of those players listed.
i can only agree with all this.Ivanisevic had all the shots, but not much of a brain. He broke serve far more often than Roddick. I remember him breaking Sampras with 2 return winners, 2 clean passing shots on the run, to even the '98 W final at 2 sets all, one of the best returning games I've ever seen on fast grass. Just highlights of that one game alone would be enough to prove his game wasn't mediocre, I'm not sure of many who could do that on Sampras' 1st serve, esp on that surface.
His best results early in his career were on clay, as he got better he concentrated more on Wimbledon & got a bit careless with other aspects of his game & concentrated more on his serve. If you only watched him on grass, you may think the rest of his game was bad(since there weren't a lot of rallies back then) & when you have a serve like that, why exert yourself on return games? just swing away & only try when you get to 30-all or something.
But the rest of his game was not mediocre, he reached 3 FO QF, finalist of Hamburg(slowest of clay events), finalist of Rome, bronze medalist at '92 Barcelona Olympics.
He certainly didn't do all that with just a serve, he was no Roddick(compare their backhands, its not even close, Goran could step in & hit winners with that shot-ask Sampras or Becker, while Roddick's is pretty much a joke)
he is part of one of the alltime best points:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BqXWog14KzY