Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by TheFifthSet, Oct 31, 2009.
. . . On hardcourts.
nadal, roddick, hewitt.
Career wise all 3 are pretty close.
Agreed mostly, although I'd say Roddick has had the better career on HC by a fair margin. Both have a slam, and 4 MS on HC, although Roddick has 22 hardcourt titles to Nadal's 9.
But Roddick is still about 5 years older than Nadal, although it's unlikely Nadal will win 13 HC titles over the next 5 years.
--- moderate margin ---
--- bigger margin ---
But they all fail in comparison compared to Karlovic!
really? i think it's
1.Hewitt- 3 HC grand slam finals winning 1
2.Roddick- 2 HC grand slam finals winning 1
3.Nadal- 1 HC grand slam final winning 1
To rank their careers I almost agree with this; I would rank Roddick first and Hewitt second.
However, currently I think Nadal has shown significantly greater consistency than both Roddick and Hewitt, though Hewitt makes sense being at the bottom since this is his first year back post-surgery.
I dunno I have to say with the prevalence of recent injuries for all three players, it's hard to rank them as they are today without looking at their overall careers, and as such, I like this breakdown but I would include total number of titles rather than GS alone, whcih is why Roddick wins.
totally agree with you
Guys, let's not forget the fact that Nadal is from Spain, Roddick is from US, and Hewitt is from Australia, which makes a big difference imo. Nadal has less experience playing on hard courts, whereas Roddick and Hewitt have been exposed to them their entire lives, ad nauseam. I think the fact that Nadal is competing at a high level on them is a credit to not just the academies that introduced him to hard courts, but to play well on them.
Roddick and Hewitt play hard court friendly styles and Nadal is a clay courter but still on pace to have about the same, if not better career achievements on hard courts, another credit to the Spaniard.
Are we talking about these guys in their prime or at the moment.
Makes ZERO difference who they are and where they came from. We are evaluating their career on HC - what they have achieved. The facts.
Roddick did win the US masters back to bak in cincy and monteal + winning the US open.
Roddick achieved most of his HC success when he will a very good player. Then he slipped in 06/07/08 so it's natural players have progressed.
roddick does have a slam runners up and 4 semis on hard though. I would say hewitt is in the same boat as roddick.
It matters big time. Name 5 spanish players in the last 20 years who have achieved something great on HC(slams,masters or won TMC). Hell,you probably have more americans in history winning titles on clay than spanish players winning HC masters events or GS's. The FACT is that spanish players are almost all CC at heart but this new breed of players also adapts their game to the other surfaces.
In the 1990-2009(almost 20 years),the last spanish guys before Nadal to win a HC masters event was corretja in Miami in 2000,moya in cincy in 2002 and JCF in Madrid in 2003. That's 3 HC masters titles in 20 freaking years before Nadal came along,even though there are twice as many HC masters titles. But if you look at places like Rome,MC,or Hamburg they have dominated by spaniards. Since 1990 Spanish players have won just 1 HC GS(Nadal in 09') but they have dominated RG. However you do see a lot of ozzie and american players in those HC MS and GS finals.
Nadal won 5 MS's on hard in the last 5 years,as much as the Armada in 20 and he has brought them the only HC GS in the last 20 years. I'd say he is doing alright. Nadal winning AO is like Roddick winning RG. Few saw it happening.
So where you come from matters.
So Djokovic then enters the conversation because he has excelled so much on hard comparative to the results of the other Serbians?
Djokovic has won 10 more hard court titles, including 3 masters series shields, 1 masters cup and 1 Grand slam on hard, compared to what all male Serbian players combined have won ever.
Well, they have all won 1 grand slam on hardcourt, Roddick and Hewitt the US Open, and Nadal the Australian Open, so basically they are equally there.
At the moment I'd say though:
1. Nadal (if he is 100% fit)
And then, far behind these days..
Nadal /Roddick and Hewitt
Career wise Hewitt has the edge over Roddick on hard.
Hewitt has 3 slam finals on hard compared to 2 to Roddick (winning 1 each).
Hewitt has 2 Masters Cup wins on hard compared to Roddicks 0.
Hewitt has 2 more titles on hard compared to Roddick (19 to 17).
Roddick though has 4 Masters shields compared to Hewitt's 2.
So in terms of career on hard Hewitt>Roddick>Nadal.
But right now I would put it as Roddick>Nadal>Hewitt.
i think it's impossible to call.
And for the guy who thinks that where the player hails from matters, it doesn't. It's about how good a player is.
Serbia has never been a powerhouse in tennis(not Yugoslavia just so we know what we are talking about),Spain has but as I have pointed out they have had little success on HC in the last 20 years. Nadal is an exception,not the norm. So it matters. How many clay titles have roddick and hewitt won?
How exactly does Spain's lack of success on hard somehow make Nadal a better hard court player than a player from the USA?
Players dont get handicapped based on what other players from their country have achieved before them. If Nadal plays Federer in the Aus Open final he doesnt get a 1 set advantage because no other Spaniard has been there before, so why should his place in history be somehow given an asterix and his success on hard elevated because of what other players from his country have failed to do?
The OP asked to rank these players on their success on hard. He didnt ask us to rate their success on hard relative to the success on hard of players from their home country.
Roddick and Hewitt have won about 4 or so titles on clay each I believe. They are not as good as Nadal is on clay. That doesn't somehow make their achievements on hard less impressive. They are two completely separate things.
So Spains success on clay makes Nadal's achievements on Hard more impressive, but for some reason Serbia's lack of success on any surface has no impact at all on Djokovic's success?
I'm not saying that all spaniards should kick ass on clay but fact is that most of them do that only on clay. It's a reality of tennis in the last decades. Spaniard are great on clay and usually average elsewhere. Ozzies and Americans are usually great on faster surfaces and average on clay. Croatian players are usually tall with booming serves. French players usually have a beautiful,aesthetic game which lacks consistency I don't agree with generalizations but a lot of what I wrote up there is true. Sure,there are exceptions but not many.
Why don't we have more great american claycourters? Why aren't there more spanish HC players since spain is probably the greatest tennis nation right now? Because the american approach(offensive/power tennis) doesn't work on clay and because the spanish grinder approach(defensive/counterpunching tennis) rarely works on faster surfaces. Take a guy with Nadal's talent for hitting a ball when he is 3-4 years old,put him in the USA for example and most likely his style won't be that of a CC's. First he will have been "born" into a tennis world where a booming serve is a must,where offensive tennis is required and where there are few claycourts. Take a look at how many CC champions the US has produced.
Nadal has lived in Spain,trained in Spain so its normal that he developed a grinder,CC style,which is characteristic to spanish tennis. There are other spanish players who have a more offensive style,like verdasco/lopez(who even plays S/V,the polar opposite of CC tennis) but they have had limited success. Where you come from usually affects your style of play and your talent and hard work will decide whether you can make it or not.
Hold on,I didn't say that Nadal's success makes him better than Roddick or hewitt. Nadal and hewitt rank about equal in my book on HC and roddick is first out of these three.
I said that Nadal's success on HC is a huge exception for what spanish tennis has been bringing to HC in the last 20 years and yes,it is an impressive achievement when you consider his background. The guy won 5 masters HC events and 1 HC GS.
Hewitt and Roddick did win on clay but did they win clay masters events or the RG?
And why does any of that make Nadal better than Roddick and Hewitt on hardcourt?
Is it because it was more difficult for him to achieve that level of success? There are no extra points for effort in tennis as far as I know.
I honestly can't compare the two. Spain is a country with tradition in tennis. Serbia(on its own) is a young country and the only important players so far are djoker/tipsarevic/troicki and ivanovic/jankovic for the girls. Serbian tennis doesn't have a defining characteristic yet. Most players leave to train in other countries at a young age whereas a lot of players actually come to Spain to learn,because they have some of the best schools around.
I wasn't trying to upgrade Nadal's achievements regardless of what you think.
Yes it is impressive when you consider his background. Otherwise though in terms of pure accomplishments and compared to the results of Hewitt and Roddick, its not that impressive.
What do clay court results have to do with anything when we're talking about hard court?
Please point out the sentence/paragraph where I said that Nadal should be first out of these three because his country hasn't achieved much on HC. That's your take on the situation.
My first post was responding the IvanAndreevich who said that where you come from shouldn't affect your success on a particular surface(that's how I understood it at least),but your talent should and I disagreed because your country can influence your style quite a lot(and thus your success on particular surfaces) as I have shown in my other posts.
I was trying to make a point that Nadal,the spaniard,made greater advances on his worst surface by winning HC masters and GS events whereas Roddick and Hewitt couldn't even manage 1 CC masters event,nevermind the RG.
But it has nothing to do with who is better on HC. If you read my posts above you will see the order I put them in.
In terms of play level at this very moment:
Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt
In terms of career achievements, you reverse that:
Hewitt, Roddick, Nadal
Have you seen Nadal play on HC in the last few weeks ? I would agree with this order if we take their results on HC in the last few weeks but both roddick and hewitt seemed to be playing a better HC game than Nadal to me but they couldn't get it together in the critical moments(not to mention that roddick even got injured). Both Hewitt and Roddick have better HC games than Nadal.
If the three played a round robin on a hard court today, I think it goes:
Roddick defeats Nadal in 3 sets
Nadal defeats Hewitt in straights
Roddick defeats Hewitt in straights
If we're looking at their careers as a whole, I'd say it goes:
Roddick, Hewitt, Nadal because Roddick and Hewitt have excelled on hard courts while Nadal, though still young, hasn't quite had the success of others just yet.
Nadal is still reaching the semis of every event. What are Roddick and Hewitt's results on hard courts since Wimbledon again? If Hewitt and Roddick had better hard court games right now why are they getting 40% the results even with Nadal in his worst form and playing on the faster hard courts. Dont be ridiculous.
Other than the lightning Dubai courts Roddick hasnt beaten Nadal on a hard court in a long time. You are crazy to look at their results on hard courts this year, including even since Wimbledon, and think Roddick would beat Nadal on hard courts right now, even with Nadal being vurnerable.
If the three played on hard courts now IMO:
Nadal defeats Roddick in straights
Nadal defeats Hewitt in straights
Hewitt defeats Roddick in three sets (maybe)
2 Slams, 1 Slam, 6 Slams?
Real ranking - not purely in terms of achievement:
Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt
Hewitt, Nadal, Roddick
-I'm counting the TMC as a hardcourt tournament, if not then switch 1 and 2.
Right now it would be Nadal then tie for second, both are pretty even right now.
Nadal beat the Hardcourt GOAT to win his Hardcourt Slam.
Roddick beat Ferrero, who is no slouch but is no Federer (and no Sampras, for that matter).
Roddick is not as good as Hewitt and Nadal when you compare the level of opponents they had to go through to win their biggest HC titles.
Nadal has 5 HC MS titles (+ 4 finals), AO title and Olympic HC Gold.
Nadal>Roddick>Hewitt (Roddick and Hewitt are extremely close to one another).
Interesting that no one had pointed out that Olympic Singles gold, which was on HC.
I apologize if you're a Nadal fan, but he'll never win another slam outside the French Open again. He peaked too early, and his knees gave out. That's one of the worst joints to injure Whereas Roddick hasn't injured any major joints at all. (knock on wood) He'd outlast him as wierd as that may sound.
Plus the 5 HC MS shields with 4 runners up (made the finals at 9 MS HC events and won 5).
Nadal is by far the most accomplished of the 3 on every surface (his grass achievements are much closer to Hewitt and Roddick, however).
I don't know... I see another wimbledon title under his belt. If he's lucky, maybe an Australian Open, considering it's practicially hardcourt engineered with Nadal in mind. Don't think he'll ever have the fitness and game to win a US Open title though.
true but Hewitt beat Sampras in a USO final where Sampras had home advantage and his first grand slam final appearance which could have possibly made him nervous a bit.
Rafa's knees are now fine and haven't been an issue since returning after Wimbledon.
His problem at the moment is in his head and heart (desire to compete and win), not his body. Federer had the same type of problem from late 2007 to early 2009.
How he competes in Paris, London and the 2010 AO will be telling to his success in all of 2010, IMO.
Why Roddick in front of Hewitt?
I would put Hewitt ahead of Nadal at this time because he has made 3 finals on hard compared to Nadal's 1.
Also if you include the Masters cup as a masters title than Hewitt and Nadal are pretty even in that respect. Hewitt has 4 MS and 5 runner ups, Nadal has 5 MS and 4 runner ups.
Hewitt has more titles on hard at this time also.
That was a tough call and could go either way, IMO. I rank MS events right below the slams and Roddick has fared better at those, historically.
It really is a tossup between Roddick and Hewitt for 2nd and 3rd place behind Nadal. Hewitt is the better grass player of he and Roddick. However, Nadal is also better than both Roddick and Hewitt on grass as well but by a much smaller margin than HC's.
Don't really see how he accomplished more than Roddick on hardcourts though. Both have a slam on HC, but Roddick has an additional final and 4-5 hardcourt semi's, and 2.5 times the amount of titles on hardcourts.
I agree, which is why I place Hewitt above Roddick.
Besides, Hewitt's made more HC slam finals than Roddick.
It's hard to decide whether Nadal or Hewitt is the best of the 3.
I'll say Hewitt has the edge, but if Nadal ever wins the YEC or wins/makes another HC Slam final, then he is the clear #1 amongst these 3.
The MC is not a MS title. It's round robin and is completely different.
Separate names with a comma.