Pat Cash: "Federer not even the second greatest in his own era"

D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
%2Fmethode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2Fe08e8ca8-c13f-11ea-a824-905810f36b8c.jpg
 

Fiero425

Legend
Hewitt was better than Sampras in 00-02, never meant Hewitt the tennis player was a better player overall than Sampras. Sampras is a GOAT candidate and former GOAT while Hewitt is not even an ATG, he is in the league of Murray-Stan-Roddick and nothing more, however in 00-02 he was better than Sampras and so he won. Can't help it, you can say age brought down Sampras but then can't change history.

Well unfortunately for all concerned "EVERYONE" was better than Sampras during a period '00-02! After winninng Wimbledon in 2000, he fell off a cliff unable to win anything for over 2 years. IMO, a final indignity was losing a 2nd round match to some Swiss player at '02 Wimbledon I'd never heard of; George Bastl! That 2002 USO finale saved his legacy even though he had broken the record and had 13 Majors! "Thanks Andre for being Pete's pigeon so many times!" :unsure:
 
Last edited:

Sunny014

Legend
Well unfortunately for all concerned "EVERYONE" was better than Sampras during a period '00-02! After winninng Wimbledon in 2000, he fell off a cliff unable to win anything for over 2 years. IMO, a final indignity was losing a 2nd round match to some Swiss player at '02 Wimbledon I'd never heard of; George Bastl! :unsure:

Not everyone but quite a few :

Sampras was ranked 3rd at the end of 2000 when Hewitt was ranked 7th, Kuerten was ranked 1, Safin ranked 2 and Agassi 6th.
Sampras was ranked 10th at the end of 2001 when Hewitt was ranked 1, Kuerten ranked 2 and Agassi ranked 3.
Sampras was ranked 13th at the end of 2002 when Hewitt was ranked 1, Agassi ranked 2 and Safin ranked 3.
 

itrium84

Hall of Fame
Stats don't determine who is greater.

Federer only had 14 as his target and he did not know that he needed to raise it to 20 and even that would not be safe, had he known this in 2010 then he would have done everything required to add more slams and would have desperately taken it to 24-25 if he knew that would be the mark. He raised his gear in 2014-2015 after taking his foot off the accelerator in 2010-2014 period, he would have made the racquet change much before if he knew what future lies. ...... Djokovic has an advantage of being younger and due to no rivals in the younger generation .... So stats wont be enough to judge, Federer will remain greater than always until the bar is raised really high.
You will never be able to realize that during his career, Fed already gave his best, all he had and more. He was never satisfied, he remained "hungry" and won all he was capable of.
I admire him for that, because both Novak and Rafa had their "mentally down" prolonged periods, Fed never spiraled down.
It's pity you're unable to recognize this great quality of his.
 

Sunny014

Legend
You will never be able to realize that during his career, Fed already gave his best, all he had and more. He was never satisfied, he remained "hungry" and won all he was capable of.
I admire him for that, because both Novak and Rafa had their "mentally down" prolonged periods, Fed never spiraled down.
It's pity you're unable to recognize this great quality of his.

No he was not hungry enough in the beginning of his career, was complacent at his peak and did loosen the grip in 2010-2011 period after breaking Sampras's record, he then did a few mistakes too which was a result of bad luck mixed with some bad decisions, anyway, I don't need you to teach me what quality he had and what he did not.
 
One can still argue 2nd place. Nadal needs another 2 slams to take over the #2 GOAT ranking IMO. Unless Nadal wins Australia then hes probably #2.. Nadal's problem is his lack of time #1 and no year end title which Fed has on him. Though Nadal does have the Olympic singles gold which Fed never got
 

Sunny014

Legend
One can still argue 2nd place. Nadal needs another 2 slams to take over the #2 GOAT ranking IMO. Unless Nadal wins Australia then hes probably #2.. Nadal's problem is his lack of time #1 and no year end title which Fed has on him. Though Nadal does have the Olympic singles gold which Fed never got

Is Tennis a record piling nerd fetish that we seek greatness with these sorts of parameters ???

For a common Tennis fan who watched Tennis for 30 years it was Sampras dominating the 90s, Federer dominating the 00s and Djokovic dominating the 2010s, even the rankings weeks and YECs say the same, Nadal IMO should never even be in the race compared to these 3, however Nadal despite being disqualified from the GOAT Race can be in league of his own because we remember him as a force on clay for 2 decades. These sort of GOAT Races are all media manufactured, you trying to find a 2 is further manufactured by you that is a bit faulty.

Nadal throughout his life has been 2 in both decades, he didn't have his era, how can he be GOAT ?
 

Sunny014

Legend
So random TTW posters know more about @Spencer Gore than the actual poster does. Right.

@NoleIsBoat

Do you know why/how Sampras won US open in 02 ?
Sampras won it because Hewitt was on the opposite side of the draw with Agassi. Had Hewitt been on this side of the draw then he would have taken out Pete for sure, everybody who witnessed Tennis in that era knows that Hewitt was returning the Sampras serve even better than Agassi was and his passing shots were also much better than Andre's circa 01-02, Pete was completely sorted out by Hewitt, it was luck that Hewitt was taken out by Agassi and then Agassi was gassed out for the final, Pete tamed a tired Agassi in the final or else it was Agassi's slam if the draw was opposite with Hewitt-Sampras in the semis, that's how good Hewitt was back then....... So never talk of weak eras or other stupidity that you said earlier (some hours ago) like Medvedev/Thiem/Tsitsipas doing what Hewitt did if in that era. Senior posters in age here know what Hewitt was in early 00s and how he had brought down Sampras, you too should know, lol
 
Last edited:

itrium84

Hall of Fame
No he was not hungry enough in the beginning of his career, was complacent at his peak and did loosen the grip in 2010-2011 period after breaking Sampras's record, he then did a few mistakes too which was a result of bad luck mixed with some bad decisions, anyway, I don't need you to teach me what quality he had and what he did not.
You have less respect for Fed than I do, quite strange this is.
 

itrium84

Hall of Fame
Is Tennis a record piling nerd fetish that we seek greatness with these sorts of parameters ???

For a common Tennis fan who watched Tennis for 30 years it was Sampras dominating the 90s, Federer dominating the 00s and Djokovic dominating the 2010s, even the rankings weeks and YECs say the same, Nadal IMO should never even be in the race compared to these 3, however Nadal despite being disqualified from the GOAT Race can be in league of his own because we remember him as a force on clay for 2 decades. These sort of GOAT Races are all media manufactured, you trying to find a 2 is further manufactured by you that is a bit faulty.

Nadal throughout his life has been 2 in both decades, he didn't have his era, how can he be GOAT ?
Nadal is G2OAT - Greatest No2 Of All Times, and he has weeks no2 to prove it.
 

itrium84

Hall of Fame
@NoleIsBoat

Do you know why/how Sampras won US open in 02 ?
Sampras won it because Hewitt was on the opposite side of the draw with Agassi. Had Hewitt been on this side of the draw then he would have taken out Pete for sure, everybody who witnessed Tennis in that era knows that Hewitt was returning the Sampras serve even better than Agassi was and his passing shots were also much better than Andre's circa 01-02, Pete was completely sorted out by Hewitt, it was luck that Hewitt was taken out by Agassi and then Agassi was gassed out for the final, Pete tamed a tired Agassi in the final or else it was Agassi's slam if the draw was opposite with Hewitt-Sampras in the semis, that's how good Hewitt was back then....... So never talk of weak eras or other stupidity that you said earlier (some hours ago) like Medvedev/Thiem/Tsitsipas doing what Hewitt did if in that era. Senior posters in age here know what Hewitt was in early 00s and how he had brought down Sampras, you too should know, lol
Hewitt woulda coulda shoulda be GOAT actually, he almost became one. :)
 

Sunny014

Legend
Nadal is G2OAT - Greatest No2 Of All Times, and he has weeks no2 to prove it.

Number 2 means Beta.
He is not in the league of Sampras-Fed-Novak who ruled their decades and had enormous weeks at 1 and at YECs too.... Minimum 4-5 mandatory for GOATs ...

In the modern era (age of ending of prime * 10) = weeks at 1 is mandatory for GOAT candidates

Lendl-Connors period had prime ending at 27, so thats 270 odd weeks, he had 268 and Lendl had 270.
Sampras period had prime ending at 28 so thats 280 odd weeks, Sampras had 286.
Fed period had prime ending at roughly 31 (his age in 2012) so that is 310 weeks.
Novak is said to still be in his prime or close to it, so he has 330-340 weeks.

Nadal has what ?? 210 weeks ??? - Disqualified !
 
This is a terrible way to look at things, but the number you show for Djokovic is wrong. He would be at 8 if you take out his best surface.

There are four surfaces now, NOT three.

Anyone who has played on Plexicushion, GreenSet and DecoTurf II knows this.

Djokovic's favoured surface is either Plexicusion/GreenSet or DecoTurf II. So pick one or the other. (His performances at AO would suggest Plexicushion/GreenSet is his best surface.)

Djokovic is the ONLY player to achieve the Dual Career Grand Slam on FOUR surfaces. If he achieves the GRAND SLAM this year, he will be the only player to achieve it on four distinct surfaces if you don't consider the three Grass court surfaces of the AO, Wimb and USO of the 1960s as being different - the actually played as differently to each other as PP/GS and DTII do.
 

canta_Brian

Hall of Fame
How many slams did Roddick win going through an ATG? 0? Same as Thiem, Tsitsipas, Zverev, Medvedev who you all call losers and jokers :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:
Let me guess, your argument that Djokovic is the greatest is predicated on the fact that Federer beat Roddick in a Wimbledon final.
 

canta_Brian

Hall of Fame
It's more likely predicated on Djokovic beating Federer in all 3 Wimbledon finals that they've played.
Christ but you are spectacularly dim, and unimaginably dull.

No 32 year old GOAT contender has ever been down match point to a 37 year old opponent. If you’re claiming to be the greatest, you win matches against the elderly without dropping sets.
 
Come back to me when you figure out how old they were at the time, and how large the age difference is.

I never understand this particular comeback.

It is Tennis, it is a sport ... you can only play who you play. You can only beat who you beat.

If age is such an issue, the older players would retire earlier because they wouldn't have a chance to beat the younger ones. They continue because they think they have a chance of winning, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

The way you are talking ... a 35yo should NEVER beat a 25yo. Yet we see it happening all the time.

In any case, you don't know what you are talking about if you don't understand that ...

Biological Age DOES NOT EQUAL Chronological Age.
 
One can still argue 2nd place. Nadal needs another 2 slams to take over the #2 GOAT ranking IMO. Unless Nadal wins Australia then hes probably #2.. Nadal's problem is his lack of time #1 and no year end title which Fed has on him. Though Nadal does have the Olympic singles gold which Fed never got
To be fair Rafa has 8 more masters titles than Fed and a significant H2H advantage over him too. Then Olympic gold like you say. I think all Rafa needs is 1 more slam then he’s ahead of Fed in my view.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
I never understand this particular comeback.

It is Tennis, it is a sport ... you can only play who you play. You can only beat who you beat.

If age is such an issue, the older players would retire earlier because they wouldn't have a chance to beat the younger ones. They continue because they think they have a chance of winning, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

The way you are talking ... a 35yo should NEVER beat a 25yo. Yet we see it happening all the time.

In any case, you don't know what you are talking about if you don't understand that ...

Biological Age DOES NOT EQUAL Chronological Age.
Did you read my original post? I quoted the poster named Canta_Brian said "No 32 year old GOAT contender has ever been down match point to a 37 year old opponent "

I was pointing out that not only was Laver MP down to Pancho, he lost to him quite a few times when Pancho was 38-40 and Laver was 28-30. So his statement was factually untrue. I think you have us mixed up, you should be responding to him not me.
 
Did you read my original post?

Apologies for the mix up there.

He certainly got it wrong on several counts. But I'm not surprised that fanatics of a certain Big 3 player use age difference to justify their champion.

Personally, if I see Federer playing anyone, I assume he is playing to win and age is just a number. Otherwise why bother?

The minute tennis fas start using Federer's age as an excuse for poor performances is the time Federer should schedule and announce his Farewell Tour!
 

Fiero425

Legend
Apologies for the mix up there.

He certainly got it wrong on several counts. But I'm not surprised that fanatics of a certain Big 3 player use age difference to justify their champion.

Personally, if I see Federer playing anyone, I assume he is playing to win and age is just a number. Otherwise why bother?

The minute tennis fas start using Federer's age as an excuse for poor performances is the time Federer should schedule and announce his Farewell Tour!

Been saying that for years! Why use the age difference when Fed was actually at MP in a Wimbledon Final vs Djokovic 2 years ago? :unsure:
 

Biotic

Hall of Fame
So you're saying Federer has no claim to be the greatest because he lost a set to the elderly Agassi in the US Open final. Interesting.

It's a matter of preference, really.

Each of us values greatness differently. So, choose wisely:

1. The one who snatches the victory from the jaws of defeat
2.The one who snatches the defeat from the jaws of victory
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Christ but you are spectacularly dim, and unimaginably dull.

No 32 year old GOAT contender has ever been down match point to a 37 year old opponent. If you’re claiming to be the greatest, you win matches against the elderly without dropping sets.
37 year old Federer fired 25 aces and 94 winners in that final. It’s disingenuous to call him “elderly”, when modern medicine, physios, nutrition and dedication has allowed Federer and the other big 3 to play prime tennis well into their 30s.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
37 year old Federer fired 25 aces and 94 winners in that final. It’s disingenuous to call him “elderly”, when modern medicine, physios, nutrition and dedication has allowed Federer and the other big 3 to play prime tennis well into their 30s.
Federer played his worst Wimbeldon final in 2019.
 

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
Pat Cash chatting b*llocks?

Quelle surprise(!)

He's vying for the title of "ex-pro with the most ridiculous takes" alongside Mats Wilander.

John McEnroe looks intelligent and thoughtful by comparison.
 

canta_Brian

Hall of Fame
37 year old Federer fired 25 aces and 94 winners in that final. It’s disingenuous to call him “elderly”, when modern medicine, physios, nutrition and dedication has allowed Federer and the other big 3 to play prime tennis well into their 30s.
All that proves is Fed’s greatness. It says nothing about Djok
 

itrium84

Hall of Fame
It depends where he wins. If he wins off clay for his next one I think one is enough. If it’s just another french then yeah he probably needs another to make it more clear cut.
I just find it very hard to give advantage to the guy with average ATG no1 record and below-ATG YEC record, against recent GOAT. Rafa's also behind Fed in BOAT criteria. These are all important factors.
Even if Rafa wins USO2021 and AO2022, I would say he barely eclipsed Fed by a slim margin.
 
I think one more for Rafa would be enough to usurp Roger in the list. I don't think it matters where he does it as long as he beats Djokovic in the Final to achieve the Title.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
What did Djokovic do in the 2019 final that made him better than 2014/2015 when he played Federer?
2015 was his best but 2014/2019 are comparable. 2019 was more clutch in the big points than 2014. Overall level similar though, precision and depth from both sides , deep returns to feet, BH winners, clutch serving.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
2015 was his best but 2014/2019 are comparable. 2019 was more clutch in the big points than 2014. Overall level similar though, precision and depth from both sides , deep returns to feet, BH winners, clutch serving.
Djokovic had way better stats in the 2014 match vs a better Federer bar one little slip at end of the fifth. Did you say the returning and power hitting was equal?
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Djokovic 68 winners to 27 errors in 2014
Djokovic 54 winners to 52 errors in 2019

Djokovic was broken less in 2014 and broke once more as well.
Djokovic donated a 1-6 set in 2019 which affects the stats. His play in tiebreaks and championship points was top, and he saved it for those big moments.
 
Djokovic's game was far below par in the 2019 Wimbledon (you could tell from the start he was having an off-day) yet he still won. That's GOATness right there.
 
Top