Peak Medvedev vs Peak Hewitt
- Thread starter Nadalgaenger
- Start date
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
I’d like to know exactly how the second option got to 30 votes.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Well…
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Ask Djokovic this question
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Watch the match today and ask this again
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
Hewitt would have beaten No Legs Nole today. That why I wish Nadal would have played
NAS
Hall of Fame
Med could have beaten no leg Sampras also, Sampras was done and dusted after many hard matches back to back with no rest between semi and final
NAS
Hall of Fame
Rafa was not going past Zverev, Med or Novak in quaters or Semi
Mainad
Bionic Poster
BGod
G.O.A.T.
Still this.
TennisLurker
Professional
Result would be pretty similar to this, maybe a bit closer.
This is stupid
Hewitt is 178. Same size as Connors, taller than Nishikori, almost the height of Agassi.
Diego is a clay courter who is probably in the 1.65-1.70 region
The only top 100 player of the Hewitt age who was as short as Schwartzman was Olivier Rochus, who has a surprisingly good h2h against Djokovic iirc. And he had a far lower ranking than Schwartzman.
FD3S
Hall of Fame
Oof, that match. That was a straight up demolition after the first set, with most of the Sampras net forays turning into target practice for a frighteningly accurate Hewitt.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Hewitt would have been blitzed yesterday. One set at best. He doesn’t have enough offense to hurt Med.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Big miss.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Guy is doubling down on his ignorance.
The numbers probably back it up too, but more because the game has changed completely. Med is like some form of Usain Bolt of tennis that doesn't miss and hits ton of aces.
80s New Wave
Semi-Pro
Just to be clear peak hewitt would return a lot better than djokovic did yesterday so Medvedev wouldn't breeze through his service games as easily. That said med would still get more free points than hewitt on serve which may be the difference.
Once the ball is in play not much to differentiate the 2, seems like there would be a lot of endless rallies. Med doesn't really come to net so Hewitts superior passing shots wouldn't matter too much.
Once the ball is in play not much to differentiate the 2, seems like there would be a lot of endless rallies. Med doesn't really come to net so Hewitts superior passing shots wouldn't matter too much.
Last edited:
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
Peak Hewitt was no slouch. As another poster mentioned, Hewitt's return would have been 10x better than Nole's was yesterday. If Hewitt can handle Pete's serve I think he can handle Med's. LOL
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
You're saying that as if this final "proved" something. It didn't.
Hewitt did even better in a very, very similar situation to Medvedev when he took Sampras to the cleaners in the 2001 US Open final.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Lol Peak Hewitt could NOT return better than Novak Djokovic.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
more like he's fishing for reactions I think
Sunny014
Legend
Hewitt was born in 81, if he was born in 1997 then this means in 16 years he would be at least 2+ inches taller, that means around 6'1, he would more muscular, would be lightning fast in his footwork as usual.....teenage prodigy as well who would be in the top 5 before Medvedev.
I see him being ranked 1 now with 2 slams, he would smoke Medvedev in the final.
I see him being ranked 1 now with 2 slams, he would smoke Medvedev in the final.
Yesterday was probably the worst Novak ever returned in a slam final. One break at the very end which was basically donated because Medvedev was rattled by the crowd. Medvedev was serving very well, but not that well. He won like 76% of his second serve points, minus double faults. That's unheard of for Novak.
Hewitt in 01, 02, 04, or 05 could certainly return better than that. Whether that's enough to beat Medvedev overall, I don't know, but acting like Hewitt can't perform better than one of Novak's all-time worst performances is silly.
80s New Wave
Semi-Pro
I was referring to how Djokovic returned in the final only, where I thought he was surprisingly poor. No argument that career wise Djokovic returns better than Hewitt, he just didn't do it in this match.
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
Of course he could. Novak left his body in this match. The occasion got to him and he was all emotions... Under normal circumstances, Novak returns a lot better. As would peak Hewitt. Hewitt had a super solid ground game and was a top returner.
Julian Houston
Semi-Pro
Hewitt achieved much more but that was 20 years ago's tennis. Med is 20 yrs later where technology and training styles are higher. I will say Hewitt still the better player as he knew how to get to 80 weeks #1 and win 2 slams. Federer was losing like 7-1 h2h and took 2 years to figure Hewitt out.
aman92
Legend
Med is very likely to overtake most of Hewitt's achievements though by the time his career finishes.
Btw don't really understand this comparison, seems totally random. Better compare Med with his fellow Russian Safin
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
pigeon of a weak era vulture has nothing to challenge the ruthless russian assassin.......
Julian Houston
Semi-Pro
yeah in future med may win 8 slams and more weeks number 1.
The comparison is due to the counter punching style, safin hits more aggressive balls.
Maybe med should be compared more like murray, the more recent player. Both send back fluff balls from 2 meters behind the baseline.
NonP
Legend
If we're talking hard only I'll just repeat my words of wisdom from the (nuked) Roddick-Medvedev thread: wait till the youngster's career is over.
If we're talking who's the better overall player, though, the answer is easily Hewitt, for this reason: Med will never be a serious contender on grass and clay unless he totally revamps his game. Here's why. A British bud of mine, who does know his tennis (like understanding why Pistol is the BOAT), attended this year's Wimbledon and caught one of Med's matches, and he told moi and another bud (by email - neither of 'em posts here) that TV does not do "justice" to just how FLAT Daniil's groundies are. He said Pete's and even Korda (Sr.)'s flattish strokes are nothing compared to Med's, and until the Muscovite learns to hit with more spin he'll never get very far at RG and Wimby.
Of course Rusty was no world-beater on clay himself, but at least he didn't struggle to win a CC match till his mid-20s. And on grass there's no contest. To end up with a clearly superior career based on its current trajectory Med would have to duplicate this HC season at least 2-3 more times, and for all the (historically uninformed) talk about the game becoming bigger and stronger I just don't see a 6'6"er dominating the tour for very long.
And I'm right about everything I pay attention to, so y'all better start adjusting your bets accordingly.
If we're talking who's the better overall player, though, the answer is easily Hewitt, for this reason: Med will never be a serious contender on grass and clay unless he totally revamps his game. Here's why. A British bud of mine, who does know his tennis (like understanding why Pistol is the BOAT), attended this year's Wimbledon and caught one of Med's matches, and he told moi and another bud (by email - neither of 'em posts here) that TV does not do "justice" to just how FLAT Daniil's groundies are. He said Pete's and even Korda (Sr.)'s flattish strokes are nothing compared to Med's, and until the Muscovite learns to hit with more spin he'll never get very far at RG and Wimby.
Of course Rusty was no world-beater on clay himself, but at least he didn't struggle to win a CC match till his mid-20s. And on grass there's no contest. To end up with a clearly superior career based on its current trajectory Med would have to duplicate this HC season at least 2-3 more times, and for all the (historically uninformed) talk about the game becoming bigger and stronger I just don't see a 6'6"er dominating the tour for very long.
And I'm right about everything I pay attention to, so y'all better start adjusting your bets accordingly.
racquetreligion
Hall of Fame
Peak Hewitt could not beat Safin at home with the whole stadium on his side
and would never beat this level of Meds or Nadal 2 years ago at the USO final.
David Nalbandian vs Hewitth wimby was similar to how Novak played at this final.
Watch extended highlights of Meds vs Rafa a few years ago, brilliant tennis not
of Hewitt caliber but loved Hewitt beating Kuerten, Fed and others in their home soil.
and would never beat this level of Meds or Nadal 2 years ago at the USO final.
David Nalbandian vs Hewitth wimby was similar to how Novak played at this final.
Watch extended highlights of Meds vs Rafa a few years ago, brilliant tennis not
of Hewitt caliber but loved Hewitt beating Kuerten, Fed and others in their home soil.
Olli Jokinen
Hall of Fame
Pretty sure Medvedev has the better forehand – and hits deeper.
InsideOut900
Legend
Wait, what does 33 years old Nadal have to do in a comparison with the only guy to beat 2004-2007 Fed off clay?
NatF
Bionic Poster
Disagree. Hewitt took the ball earlier, was better at creating angles, better down the line, I/O etc...depth maybe goes to Medvedev? But if you're on the baseline picking balls off your shoelaces you're going to drop a few more balls short relative to someone six feet behind the baseline.
Winners or Errors
Legend
Hewitt's game was not designed to beat guys who wore you down from the baseline. He'd have lost to Medvedev more often than not. Still, his results from 2003-2005 before the injuries set in point to him likely taking a good number of the matches. He also had grit none of the generations after Nadal-Djoker seem to have.
D
Deleted member 779124
Guest
TennisLurker
Professional
I think Hewitt could have won because of his net game.
Medvedev is a man that has a very strange game and plays 2 meters behind the baseline on hardcourt with flat shots.
Medvedev hits harder than Hewitt, but not hard enough to blow Hewitt off the court.
Medvedev is a man that has a very strange game and plays 2 meters behind the baseline on hardcourt with flat shots.
Medvedev hits harder than Hewitt, but not hard enough to blow Hewitt off the court.
This. Basicaly easy hold for Med when he serves and baseline war when Hewitt serves, with advantage for Med in the long run because he is faster and stronger.
Gazelle
G.O.A.T.
Calling
Hard to call for me but I feel Med was so underrated before Sunday due to Next Gen being awful and not winning a slam. Med while not being that entertaining to watch be a horror matchup on HC for a lot of older players like Hewitt and Roddick. It’s hard to say if he’s better but his game is incredibly solid with a huge serve
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Every proactive player who can consistently execute an attacking gameplan is a tough matchup for madlad lol.
I decided to look up Med loses especially on HC as that is the only surface he is great on and he’s only lost 5 matches in the last year.
Djokovic, PCB, RBA and Lajovic. All of them don’t play the way you are saying.
The other loss is too Rublev which does but considering the H2H is 5-1 I don’t think he has trouble with him
Similar threads
