Peak Kuerten vs Peak Thiem in a RG showdown: Who takes home the trophy?

Peak Kuerten vs Peak Thiem at RG: Who wins?

  • Kuerten in 3

    Votes: 30 30.0%
  • Kuerten in 4

    Votes: 46 46.0%
  • Kuerten in 5

    Votes: 7 7.0%
  • Thiem in 3

    Votes: 5 5.0%
  • Thiem in 4

    Votes: 9 9.0%
  • Thiem in 5

    Votes: 3 3.0%

  • Total voters
    100

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
That is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as appeal to ridicule. It ia a rethoric strategy which consists in presenting the opponent's claim as ridiculous, absurd or not worthy of serious consideration to avoid the debate about the topic in hand.

You have not provided any single argument as of why is Thiem's backhand not most complete than Federer's or Warinka's one.
I actually went to edit that post and give a real breakdown of the Thiem backhand, but accidentally deleted it lol. The gist of it was Thiem’s standard rally ball is very good, heavy and hard to attack, but he doesn’t have the variety of a guy like Federer or even Wawrinka. He has a rather rigid wrist position, which I think is a big part of what helps him generate such pace and spin reliably. He just locks his arm into place and swings for the fences with his shoulder and upper body. But that restricts his ability to get those deft angles some other guys get (just go watch the 2015 FO final; insane angles from Wawrinka, and regularly), as well as lower balls and those defensive flicks that someone like Fed is famous for. (You see this also on his return; just doesn’t have that flexibility in how he orients the racquet face when he’s going topspin. Looks stiff and jammed up fairly regularly.)

His slice is decent, not the easiest to attack, but not a particularly biting shot. You can see a lot of times his follow-through follows a more vertical plane, not driving forward horizontally into the court. That means he’s not digging into the ball to give it that spin. His slice often kind of deadens the ball by sucking the energy out of it, but it’s not the type of skidding, unpredictable slice that other guys (like Fed obviously) can turn into a weapon at times. And I actually think he’s been overusing the slice lately. I mean, I haven’t seen much of him this clay season, but last fall and early this year he was slicing a lot when I thought he should be using his much better topspin backhand.
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
I actually went to edit that post and give a real breakdown of the Thiem backhand, but accidentally deleted it lol. The gist of it was Thiem’s standard rally ball is very good, heavy and hard to attack, but he doesn’t have the variety of a guy like Federer or even Wawrinka. He has a rather rigid wrist position, which I think is a big part of what helps him generate such pace and spin reliably. He just locks his arm into place and swings for the fences with his shoulder and upper body. But that restricts his ability to get those deft angles some other guys get (just go watch the 2015 FO final; insane angles from Wawrinka, and regularly), as well as lower balls and those defensive flicks that someone like Fed is famous for. (You see this also on his return; just doesn’t have that flexibility in how he orients the racquet face when he’s going topspin. Looks stiff and jammed up fairly regularly.)

His slice is decent, not the easiest to attack, but not a particularly biting shot. You can see a lot of times his follow-through follows a more vertical plane, not driving forward horizontally into the court. That means he’s not digging into the ball to give it that spin. His slice often kind of deadens the ball by sucking the energy out of it, but it’s not the type of skidding, unpredictable slice that other guys (like Fed obviously) can turn into a weapon at times. And I actually think he’s been overusing the slice lately. I mean, I haven’t seen much of him this clay season, but last fall and early this year he was slicing a lot when I thought he should be using his much better topspin backhand.


Even if one were to grant much of this, Thiem's rally topspin backhand is so brutal (not to mention his down the line backhand) that even compared to other great backhands, it's in another league when he's really hitting it and that backhand is the overwhelming majority of what a modern game changing backhand is, no matter how good one's slice is.

A decent slice with that bludgeon is pretty awesome.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
I actually went to edit that post and give a real breakdown of the Thiem backhand, but accidentally deleted it lol. The gist of it was Thiem’s standard rally ball is very good, heavy and hard to attack, but he doesn’t have the variety of a guy like Federer or even Wawrinka. He has a rather rigid wrist position, which I think is a big part of what helps him generate such pace and spin reliably. He just locks his arm into place and swings for the fences with his shoulder and upper body. But that restricts his ability to get those deft angles some other guys get (just go watch the 2015 FO final; insane angles from Wawrinka, and regularly), as well as lower balls and those defensive flicks that someone like Fed is famous for. (You see this also on his return; just doesn’t have that flexibility in how he orients the racquet face when he’s going topspin. Looks stiff and jammed up fairly regularly.)

His slice is decent, not the easiest to attack, but not a particularly biting shot. You can see a lot of times his follow-through follows a more vertical plane, not driving forward horizontally into the court. That means he’s not digging into the ball to give it that spin. His slice often kind of deadens the ball by sucking the energy out of it, but it’s not the type of skidding, unpredictable slice that other guys (like Fed obviously) can turn into a weapon at times. And I actually think he’s been overusing the slice lately. I mean, I haven’t seen much of him this clay season, but last fall and early this year he was slicing a lot when I thought he should be using his much better topspin backhand.
10/10 analysis. Thiem's BH is a super underrated shot. Defends with it like a 2HBH, attacks with it like a FH.
 

Rosstour

G.O.A.T.
Peak Guga? Guga wins in 3 or maybe 4.

Peak Theim is a pretty good player, but peak Guga is up there in the pantheon of clay players. Theim is not.

I don't get the hype for Theim. This isn't 2018, where we're waiting around for him to get a little bit better, a little more experience. This should be his time, if it was going to be. It's not. I'm not saying that's it's over for Theim, he'll never win again, but I think it's more likely that we've already seen a lot of his best tennis. Could he go on a bit of a run? Sure. Could he snag a slam? Maybe. But, I think the chance for Theim to seize control of the tour is over. He is what he is, at this point. Theim playing at his best can compete with the best, but even playing at his best, he's not a level above anyone.

Peak Guga is on a whole other level. I can't think of anything that Theim does better than peak Guga.

Been saying this. He was lucky to get that USO. Odds are that he ends up being in the category of Korda or Johansson, where you forgot the dude ever won a Slam at all. He's declining and was never going to be that good, and it's all because of his build. He just can't move the way the Big3 did at their peaks and he's already hit his.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
That's true and that's the most worrying part. No signs of life at all. I wouldn't go so far as to say he can't beat Djokovic, but at the moment Nadal's the big favorite if they do meet.

The only thing to do now is wait and see. Writing off Thiem is a fool's errand.

Why exactly? The dude never won a single big tourney on clay, he's 28 and seems to be on a downward spiral.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I saw everyone from Vilas and Borg onward play live. We'd be talking about the clay 'mugs' like Muster and Guga if they coincided with Rafa's peak. They'd also be praying for a Nadal off day.

Thiem's physicality alone puts him above just about any clay courter who has ever played except Nadal. It's easy to dump on Thiem for not getting it done against Rafa and for his current slump but no one would have gotten it done against Rafa in form and Thiem played him as well as anyone for a bit there.
LOL, Thiem got massacred by an old Rafa. It wasn't even close.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Thiem did everything Wawrinka did at RG except win a final.
He beat Nole twice. He played Nadal better H2H in his most recent final than Stan ever has. Stan was pummeled by Nadal mercilessly.
Nadal would also pummel Kuerten.
Basically Kuerten, Stan, Fed, Nole only have RG titles because they didn’t have to play Rafa in a final.
Ummm, no.

Thiem barely beat a worse Djokovic in 2019 compared to the version Stan beat in 4 in 2015.

Did better vs Nadal H2H, sure and yet in 2017 a 32 year old Stan after 4.5 hours of tennis still didn't get bageled by Nadal, while Thiem did.

And why bring up Stan?
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I'll even go a step further. Besides Nadal, Thiem at his best may well be the best player from the backcourt on clay we've seen. He can actually go toe to toe with Nadal there as well or better than anyone and if Nadal didn't have better court sense and transition game, he could easily have lost to Thiem in their last RG final. Thiem was more or less a match for a pretty good Nadal from the backcourt.

People here tend to have short memories and to systematically undervalue anything not done by the big 3 and very few others from the past.
Dude got trashed by an old Rafa repeatedly. This overrating, man, unbelievable.

He's much worse against Nadal than Fed and Nole, so your premise could not be more wrong.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
That's absolutely true. Thiem's flat backhand power blows out Federer's one. Thiem's backhand is more of a weapon. Federer's backhand is amazing (especially in 2017), no doubt about it, but overall it overrelies on the slice. The slice is a defensive shot, useful at certain points, but it cannot be the main backhand shot. Federer sometimes abuses of repeating the slice and and not hitting powerful flat backhands.

Thiem not only hurts Nadal on hard with his one-handed backhand. He also hurts Novak
Remember the ATP 2019 finals, where Dominic defeated Novak thanks to, among other things, executing several powerful backhand winners.
Like Federer hasn't hurt Nadal on hard with his OHBH recently...
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
Ummm, no.

Thiem barely beat a worse Djokovic in 2019 compared to the version Stan beat in 4 in 2015.

Did better vs Nadal H2H, sure and yet in 2017 a 32 year old Stan after 4.5 hours of tennis still didn't get bageled by Nadal, while Thiem did.
Lol, please. Thiem is clearly a tougher matchup for Nadal than Wawrinka is, it isn't even close. Thiem's backhand actually works pretty well against Nadal's topspin. Not getting bageled is not a good metric. Thiem didn't play well in RG 2017 semifinal, but he still gave some kind of fight in the first two sets. Nadal saved 3 service games from 15-40 down, otherwise it could be closer. On the other hand, Wawrinka just had 1 BP in the final.

As for 2019, Thiem was choking like crazy in that semifinal against Djokovic, this is why it was so close. He should have won in routine 4 sets.
 

Feather

Legend
Thiem in 4.

Thiem would be a 3-times RG winner (RG 2017, RG 2018 and RG 2019) without Nadal, the same as Kuerten.

Tennis players' quality evolves over time. Thiem has a superior forehand, backhand and movement than Kuerten. Kuerten was extremelly tall, similar to Tsitsipas' height, and thus his mobility was inferior compared to elite clay players under 1,88 m.

We all know that Kuerten did beat prime Federer in RG 2004. But Roger's backhand was subpar during those days. Roger in 2006 and 2011 was in better form.

Have you seen that match? Roger went to RG as Hamburg Masters winner. It was his second masters on clay. He has won it 2002 also. In fact, the first masters that Roger won was on clay. Roger lost the match not because he had a clay problem. Kuerten played at a high level in the RG 3rd round match and Roger couldn't cope with it. It was peak Roger Federer who was straight setted by a Kuerten who came back after a hip surgery!

And when he played in Madrid 2019 after three years without playing on clay, he had two match points against Thiem! So much for the "prince of clay"
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
Dude got trashed by an old Rafa repeatedly. This overrating, man, unbelievable.

He's much worse against Nadal than Fed and Nole, so your premise could not be more wrong.

'Dude' played a good Nadal from the backcourt better than anyone else in recent memory and also beat Novak on clay 2 years in a row and handed him a bagel too. He would have absolutely mauled Federer. He's most definitely not 'much worse' against Nadal than Nole much less Fed.

But then, I know how forums like this one work so carry on with your delusions.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
'Dude' played a good Nadal from the backcourt better than anyone else in recent memory and also beat Novak on clay 2 years in a row and handed him a bagel too. He would have absolutely mauled Federer. He's most definitely not 'much worse' against Nadal than Nole much less Fed.

But then, I know how forums like this one work so carry on with your delusions.
Fed and Nole played against better versions of Nadal, that's an undeniable fact.

Thiem playing well vs Nadal from the backcourt and still getting pasted doesn't exactly help your argument.

Thiem couldn't even maul 38 year old Fed in Madrid LOL.
 

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
Even if one were to grant much of this, Thiem's rally topspin backhand is so brutal (not to mention his down the line backhand) that even compared to other great backhands, it's in another league when he's really hitting it and that backhand is the overwhelming majority of what a modern game changing backhand is, no matter how good one's slice is.

A decent slice with that bludgeon is pretty awesome.
Yeah, I agree. Thiem's backhand may not have the variety and diversity of other backhands, but it really, really excels within a fairly narrow strip that actually makes up a huge part of the game today. His forehand is still his main finishing shot and the backbone of his ground game, but that's true for basically every top male player. "Brutal" is a good word for the sheer weight of shot Thiem manages to get – not something I think we've ever seen with that level of consistency/frequency in a one-hander (hell, probably a two-hander as well). But I'd still say a guy like Wawrinka has a more "complete" topspin backhand (though a woeful slice for a one-hander), and guys like Federer and Gasquet have more complete backhands overall if we're including slice and all the other ways a backhand can excel outside those standard textbook baseline rally patterns – and that completeness was the initial comment I was responding to.
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
Fed and Nole played against better versions of Nadal, that's an undeniable fact.

Thiem playing well vs Nadal from the backcourt and still getting pasted doesn't exactly help your argument.

Thiem couldn't even maul 38 year old Fed in Madrid LOL.

It's not an 'undeniable fact' nor is anything else you claim for that matter. Federer and Djokovic would have been 'pasted' even worse than Thiem was and that's as much of an 'undeniable fact' as your own assertion. Thiem is a monster when he's on from the back of the court which is why he beat Djokovic 2 RGs in a row, even bagelling him as well.

Federer simply doesn't belong in this conversation. Madrid is next to irrelevant in this discussion of RG for what should be obvious reasons but Thiem still beat Roger there and has a 5-2 H2H. Federer is fortunate he's been out for so long such that the H2H isn't even worse than that.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It's not an 'undeniable fact' nor is anything else you claim for that matter. Federer and Djokovic would have been 'pasted' even worse than Thiem was and that's as much of an 'undeniable fact' as your own assertion. Thiem is a monster when he's on from the back of the court which is why he beat Djokovic 2 RGs in a row, even bagelling him as well.

Federer simply doesn't belong in this conversation. Madrid is next to irrelevant in this discussion of RG for what should be obvious reasons but Thiem still beat Roger there and has a 5-2 H2H. Federer is fortunate he's been out for so long such that the H2H isn't even worse than that.
Fed has played better against Claydal in BO5, sorry to ruin your parade.

Fedovic would have been pasted worse? Who's delusional now? Thiem such a monster from the backcourt that he can't play an older and slower Nadal close.
 
Last edited:

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Fed has played better against Claydal in BO5, sorry to ruin your parade.

Fedovic would have bern pasted worse? Who's delusional now? Thiem such a monster from the backcourt that he can't beat an older and slower Nadal close.
That was baby Nadal in 2006 who had no serve or BH and a loopy FH. 2017 - Nadal is a much better player with the GOAT clay FH.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It's not an 'undeniable fact' nor is anything else you claim for that matter. Federer and Djokovic would have been 'pasted' even worse than Thiem was and that's as much of an 'undeniable fact' as your own assertion. Thiem is a monster when he's on from the back of the court which is why he beat Djokovic 2 RGs in a row, even bagelling him as well.

Federer simply doesn't belong in this conversation. Madrid is next to irrelevant in this discussion of RG for what should be obvious reasons but Thiem still beat Roger there and has a 5-2 H2H. Federer is fortunate he's been out for so long such that the H2H isn't even worse than that.
Novak was in the worst form of his life in 2017. And he's been past his clay prime since 2016 and peak Thiem still barely beat him in 2019.
 
Last edited:

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
I'll even go a step further. Besides Nadal, Thiem at his best may well be the best player from the backcourt on clay we've seen. He can actually go toe to toe with Nadal there as well or better than anyone and if Nadal didn't have better court sense and transition game, he could easily have lost to Thiem in their last RG final. Thiem was more or less a match for a pretty good Nadal from the backcourt.

People here tend to have short memories and to systematically undervalue anything not done by the big 3 and very few others from the past.

Here I had thought you were decent...
 
Guga going through Bjorkman, Muster, Medvedev and Kafelnikov in a row and still having enough in the tank to put a Masterclass in his 1st Slam final should be a good indicative of his superiority. Thiem could never put together a RG run like that, even considering Kuerten's close 5 setters in 1997 and during 2000 and 2001 as well.

Mythical peak Thiem, that zones for the entire match could make for a competitive contest, but the real life peak Thiem takes a set tops, similar to 2000 and 2001 finals, 2 close sets, 2 routine/non-competitive sets.
 
Last edited:

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
Here I had thought you were decent...

Thiem from the backcourt is monstrous when he's on and in form. No one hits consistently bigger and heavier on clay (including Nadal) and he could bludgeon pretty much anyone off the court, including players who might have won RG before Nadal was the gatekeeper.

It may not look as elegant as some of you would like but Thiem at his best is a wrecking machine on clay.
 

Crazy Finn

Hall of Fame
The entire argument of the Thiem-stans is basically - he was decent (kind of) against old Rafa and beat Novak on clay. That's it.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Peak Kuerten is capable of beating anybody. Peak Kuerten gets on a serious momentum roll like a runaway train, even on hardcourt occasionally. The way Kuerten worked was to try to find his groove on the court. Sometimes he was flat throughout and played poorly. If he started building momentum, watch out.

Peak Thiem is a grinder who plays every rally like a new one, and wears you down.

It has to be peak Kuerten, as much as I like Thiem. At the 2004 French Open, Kuerten did roll back the years for one day when he beat Federer 6-4, 6-4, 6-4. Federer was supposed to win the 2004 French Open after beating Coria in 4 sets in the 2004 Hamburg final. Look at the 2001 French Open final when Kuerten played Corretja. For 2 sets, it was close and Corretja could have gone 2 sets up. Once Kuerten made it one set all instead, Kuerten quickly surged and surged and won the next two sets 6-2, 6-0. Earlier in the same tournament, Michael Russell was 1 point away from beating a flat Kuerten in 3 straight sets. Kuerten then saved the match point with a 26-stroke rally, started building momentum in the rallies and came back and won in 5 sets.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Ummm, no.

Thiem barely beat a worse Djokovic in 2019 compared to the version Stan beat in 4 in 2015.

Did better vs Nadal H2H, sure and yet in 2017 a 32 year old Stan after 4.5 hours of tennis still didn't get bageled by Nadal, while Thiem did.

And why bring up Stan?
How many clay wins has Stan mustered over Rafa outside of the train wreck of 2015?
 

Crazy Finn

Hall of Fame
Basically anyone not Big 3 or Delpo or Stan is ridiculed here.
Basically the forum is hostile to anyone under 30 who is not an ATG. Good thing I am over 30!
No one is ridiculing Theim.

They're just questioning and refuting the idea the Theim is better than Guga.

On the flip side, apparently not agreeing with these statements is "hostile".
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Peak Kuerten is capable of beating anybody. Peak Kuerten gets on a serious momentum roll like a runaway train, even on hardcourt occasionally. The way Kuerten worked was to try to find his groove on the court. Sometimes he was flat throughout and played poorly. If he started building momentum, watch out.

Peak Thiem is a grinder who plays every rally like a new one, and wears you down.

It has to be peak Kuerten, as much as I like Thiem. At the 2004 French Open, Kuerten did roll back the years for one day when he beat Federer 6-4, 6-4, 6-4. Federer was supposed to win the 2004 French Open after beating Coria in 4 sets in the 2004 Hamburg final. Look at the 2001 French Open final when Kuerten played Corretja. For 2 sets, it was close and Corretja could have gone 2 sets up. Once Kuerten made it one set all instead, Kuerten quickly surged and surged and won the next two sets 6-2, 6-0. Earlier in the same tournament, Michael Russell was 1 point away from beating a flat Kuerten in 3 straight sets. Kuerten then saved the match point with a 26-stroke rally, started building momentum in the rallies and came back and won in 5 sets.
How many matches does Kuerten win off Nadal on clay?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I'll even go a step further. Besides Nadal, Thiem at his best may well be the best player from the backcourt on clay we've seen. He can actually go toe to toe with Nadal there as well or better than anyone and if Nadal didn't have better court sense and transition game, he could easily have lost to Thiem in their last RG final. Thiem was more or less a match for a pretty good Nadal from the backcourt.

People here tend to have short memories and to systematically undervalue anything not done by the big 3 and very few others from the past.

LMAO. Thiem's lack of physical stamina cost him in RG 2019 final, RG 2020 vs schwartz and would've cost him in USO 2020 final if not for Z choking badly.
Both federer and djokovic have played significantly better vs significantly better versions of Nadal.
Soderling actually beat Nadal in RG 09.

Thiem can't win a single Masters title on clay.

Thiem isn't even in top 15 on clay, LMAO.

@metsman :

Tim being top 15 on clay is probably being generous.

Nadal
Borg
Lendl
Kuerten
Wilander
Fed
Bruguera
Courier
Djokovic
Vilas
Muster
Ferrero
Panatta
Noah
Agassi
Wawrinka

Then you have Kodes, Nastase, Chang, Moya, Kafelnikov, Medvedev, Corretja, Coria, Soderling,Costa, Ferrer, Solomon, Gomez

Top 20 maybe, but you could have an argument for him being out of that as well.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Are we talking about an adrenaline-pumped hypothetical version of Thiem who's firing on all cylinders, 100% of the time, or some version of Thiem that showed up in a particular match/tournament?

Because if the former I can see a case being made for Thiem, but if the latter, then Kuerten.
 

Martin J

Hall of Fame
Peak Kuerten is capable of beating anybody. Peak Kuerten gets on a serious momentum roll like a runaway train, even on hardcourt occasionally. The way Kuerten worked was to try to find his groove on the court. Sometimes he was flat throughout and played poorly. If he started building momentum, watch out.

Peak Thiem is a grinder who plays every rally like a new one, and wears you down.

It has to be peak Kuerten, as much as I like Thiem. At the 2004 French Open, Kuerten did roll back the years for one day when he beat Federer 6-4, 6-4, 6-4. Federer was supposed to win the 2004 French Open after beating Coria in 4 sets in the 2004 Hamburg final. Look at the 2001 French Open final when Kuerten played Corretja. For 2 sets, it was close and Corretja could have gone 2 sets up. Once Kuerten made it one set all instead, Kuerten quickly surged and surged and won the next two sets 6-2, 6-0. Earlier in the same tournament, Michael Russell was 1 point away from beating a flat Kuerten in 3 straight sets. Kuerten then saved the match point with a 26-stroke rally, started building momentum in the rallies and came back and won in 5 sets.
Good to see you posting again.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
'Dude' played a good Nadal from the backcourt better than anyone else in recent memory and also beat Novak on clay 2 years in a row and handed him a bagel too. He would have absolutely mauled Federer. He's most definitely not 'much worse' against Nadal than Nole much less Fed.

But then, I know how forums like this one work so carry on with your delusions.

He's 1-12 in sets against Nadal at the FO, so yeah he actually is worse against Nadal than Fedovic.

He also never won a CC masters despite competing in a field with older Nadal who doesn't give full effort in them anymore (as evidenced by losses to Frodo, Fognini, Zverev etc.).
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
The entire argument of the Thiem-stans is basically - he was decent (kind of) against old Rafa and beat Novak on clay. That's it.

There are very few legit Thiem-stans actually. It's mainly just Nadal fans pumping him up as competition.

Which is fine, within reason. At this point it would be akin to Fed fans saying Roddick is equal to Becker on grass.
 

Crazy Finn

Hall of Fame
I think rather than figure out how Kuerten would fare in this era, it might be easier to project Theim back into Guga's era. I was watching some old Guga matches (one good thing that came of this silly thread) and I realized something.

Theim is basically a present day - and probably lesser - version of Muster. Muster is more of a pure clay specialist whereas Theim is a hardcourt player who seems like he's a clay guy because of his play style - but they seem kinda similar to me.
 
Top