Third Serve
G.O.A.T.
The thread is disrespectful to Roddick and Hewitt by its nature in assuming both pairs of players are comparable.
D
Deleted member 781040
Guest
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
With due respect, Federer had a much higher peak to fall from. 2011/12 wouldn't be prime by Federer standards, although the period between 2011 USO and 2012 Cincinnati comes close. 2009 was prime by Roddick standards, being arguably his fourth best year (Wimbledon final pushes it over 2007 I think).
D
Deleted member 781040
Guest
Life is about both and, not either or my friend. Having said that, I wouldn't know, as I've never trolled
O
Oceans
Guest
Yes, I have realised TTW is very, very, very invested.I know
You would think these posters' stocks are tied to their favorite players
Druss
Hall of Fame
I personally think that 2009 (with the exception of Wimby) was a step below his 2003-07 (minus 2006 obviously) level. Then again i'm no expert, just going by the good old eye test. I know 2011/12 for Fed wasn't exactly prime, but it wasn't that far off from his 2008/09 level (which is considered his part of his prime).
Lleytonstation
G.O.A.T.
Wait, I can buy Fed stock?I know
You would think these posters' stocks are tied to their favorite players
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
Roddick's seasons are ordered quite easily:
03/04 (peak)
05/07/09 (medium prime)
06/08 (low prime)
He started 2010 very well at strong prime level, even getting close to #1 in the race after winning Miami, but then shoulder injury put an abrupt end to his prime forever, even if he managed tio perform just well enough to limp to #8 after a great start.
NatF
Bionic Poster
No.
Third Serve
G.O.A.T.
Nah man. I really like Nishikori but Hewitt was definitely better at peak level. I don’t think I’ve seen Murray display the kind of tennis Hewitt did in the 2001 USO final (PETE was a little below par, but you can’t deny that it was stellar stuff, nonetheless).
NatF
Bionic Poster
Would put peak Hewitt above Nishikori on every surface.
Third Serve
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, looks pretty convincing to me. On clay, Nishi has that one final where he did a fine job against Nadal before injury struck, but I’d still take Hewitt overall there. HC and grass go without saying, really.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Don't remember any notable wins for Nishikori on clay unless we're counting 2013 Fed or something lol. Nadal sucked in the Madrid 2014 final so even if he won I wouldn't put it above some of Hewitt's Davis Cup triumphs.
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
I will take Raonic's serve and Nishikori's backhand that i do know!
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
Kuerten sucked in 2001 Davis Cup QF
RS
G.O.A.T.
Ouch.
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
2004-05 Slamwitt > 2012-13 Slamray
RS
G.O.A.T.
What do you think of the idea 2007-2009 Djokovic was better than 2014-2016 Federer?
NatF
Bionic Poster
He was decent at least, apart from the serve.Kuerten sucked in 2001 Davis Cup QF
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Nishikori and Raonic by far. The only reason they didn't win Slams was because the competition evolved so much.overall including breakdown at big tournaments if you wish. Similar calibre players with similar styles.
Discuss.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
ichaseballs
Semi-Pro
no love for hewitt?
roddick and hewitt
then
kei and raonic
roddick and hewitt
then
kei and raonic
Third Serve
G.O.A.T.
Not 100% sold on 07 vs. 14 but the others are pretty clear.
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
Once they pull out the ole "garbage poster" you won!
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
14 somewhat better on aggregate, truth be told, but nothing changes significantly; neither 07 Djokovic nor 14 Federer win a slam/YEC if the years are switched, nor do they improve on their 2 masters titles. 08 v 15 and 09 v 16 feature a clear gap in Djokovic's favour so he wins the overall comparison.
Omega_7000
Legend
This has to be a joke! Raonic and Nishikori are totally worthless mugs form a generation of players that was full of pathetic mugs.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Similar level guys, Raonic / Nishikori just unfortunate not to peak in a vacuum between ATGs.
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
I always liked Nishikori's game especially for a 5'10 player.
He was born brittle unfortunately.
And competed in the most physical era in tennis history.
Blew his tires and engine out.
Raonic's serve is awesome.
InsideOut900
Hall of Fame
Understatement. He was terrible and played right into Hewitt's strengths. It would be interesting to see Lleyton vs an in form pure baseliner.
His accuracy on passing shots and quality on the RoS was stellar, but that alone doesn't paint the whole picture, since he wasn't hitting many winners or forcing errors on neutral balls in rallies.
2005 AO would still be his top level for me.
RelentlessAttack
Hall of Fame
Well Raonic beat peak Federer at Wimbledon after he had a few more years of practice since last beating Roddick in 2009. Raonic > Roddick and it’s not even close
CHillTennis
Semi-Pro
I was a huge fan of Andy Roddick, back when I was 12 / 13 years old.
He is the player that first grabbed my attention, with his big serves, and got me into watching the pro game.
Even though I later became a bigger fan of Federer and Nadal, he is still a very special player to me.
O
Oceans
Guest
That's what you think though. I could say I find Roddick vs Big 4 comparisons disrespectful. TTW should be open for discussion.
Third Serve
G.O.A.T.
Yeah but that’s a different comparison. No one says Andy Roddick is a better player than Novak Djokovic. What people do say is that the Roddick of the Wimbledon 2004 final stands a more than decent chance against the Djokovic of the Wimbledon 2019 final. That’s one specific match held up to another. One is a peak Roddick match and one is an average (even below-par) performance by Djokovic’s standards. You can make similar arguments for peak Raonic/Nishikori matches over non-peak Roddick/Hewitt matches.
Clay lover
Hall of Fame
How is this even worth asking
ForehandCross
Legend
Style of play matters a lot.
Raonic has serve and decent ground game.
******* at his best had even better serve and a FH that could overpower anyone, he even had a net game when not playing Federer.
******* shades Raonic easy.
Hewitt and Nishikori are somewhat alike. But Hewitt's ROS was a shade better, he was also a stronger server than Nishikori . And he used the net more.
Hewitt shades him too.
People need to understand that these guys were no. 1 .
And most importantly if someone is bringing up Raonic beating a dead Federer, they need go on YouTube or Wikipedia and look up Hewitt annihilating Sampras in his home slam. A teenage Hewitt was singlehandedly ending an entire era of SnV players.
Roddick for all his flaws had incredible highs, look up 2003 Toronto where he beats a very very good Federer, then USO SF-F where Roddick rallies better than what Raonic can in his dream. Or look up 2004 WB, even the matches before final. Roddick was playing the kind of power tennis Raonic wanted to.
Raonic has serve and decent ground game.
******* at his best had even better serve and a FH that could overpower anyone, he even had a net game when not playing Federer.
******* shades Raonic easy.
Hewitt and Nishikori are somewhat alike. But Hewitt's ROS was a shade better, he was also a stronger server than Nishikori . And he used the net more.
Hewitt shades him too.
People need to understand that these guys were no. 1 .
And most importantly if someone is bringing up Raonic beating a dead Federer, they need go on YouTube or Wikipedia and look up Hewitt annihilating Sampras in his home slam. A teenage Hewitt was singlehandedly ending an entire era of SnV players.
Roddick for all his flaws had incredible highs, look up 2003 Toronto where he beats a very very good Federer, then USO SF-F where Roddick rallies better than what Raonic can in his dream. Or look up 2004 WB, even the matches before final. Roddick was playing the kind of power tennis Raonic wanted to.
ForehandCross
Legend
Why there is no Hewitt >Roddick>Nishikori>Roanic option?
I agree with that, but find it hard to separate the last two.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Well he crushed a terrible baseliner in Kafelnikov as well lol. Hit a decent amount of winners in a short match, he wasn't lacking winners against Roddick either which was a good, if not great, quality match. Sampras was pretty bad and he played into Hewitt's hands but I don't think many players would have handed Sampras two breadsticks either.
TearTheRoofOff
Legend
This am do the difficult. What do am could very the answer?
InsideOut900
Hall of Fame
I was certain you were going to bring the SF into discussion.
Tbh, the highlights of that SF show Hewitt going for his shots pretty hard, perhaps he didn't need to against Sampras.
And those breadsticks sets are the equivalent of Fed losing 6-1 6-0 in the FO 08 final, except Pete was even worse to lose like that on a fast HC. Clay is more understandable, especially against that clay opponent
NatF
Bionic Poster
Well I wasn't comparing Hewitt to 2008 Nadal lol. Hewitt was going for his shots pretty much all fortnight, at least from the 4R onwards - not seen the earlier rounds in full. Hewitt often played to the level and kind of opponent he was facing. He was very aggressive off the ground in the QF and SF.I was certain you were going to bring the SF into discussion.
Tbh, the highlights of that SF show Hewitt going for his shots pretty hard, perhaps he didn't need to against Sampras.
And those breadsticks sets are the equivalent of Fed losing 6-1 6-0 in the FO 08 final, except Pete was even worse to lose like that on a fast HC. Clay is more understandable, especially against that clay opponent