thomasferrett
Hall of Fame
The non-Big-4 Slam winners of recent times.
Rank their peak level...
Rank their peak level...
Peak Delpo = Peak Waronka < Peak Cilic < Peak Goat slightly hungover Safin.
/thread
For me Wawrinka>Del Potro>Cilic.
Wawrinka and Del Potro are close but I can't put Del Potro above Wawrinka when Del Potro only has one slam and no Masters 1000s over Wawrinka who has two slams and 1 Masters 1000.
For me Wawrinka>Del Potro>Cilic.
Wawrinka and Del Potro are close but I can't put Del Potro above Wawrinka when Del Potro only has one slam and no Masters 1000s over Wawrinka who has two slams and 1 Masters 1000.
It's not a ranking of their career accomplishments but of their highest level of possible play.
I know and I ranked them on that basis.
You think Del Potro can't have a higher level of play than Wawrinka because Wawrinka has one more slam and one more masters title than Delpo? Sounds like ranking based on titles to me.
You think Del Potro can't have a higher level of play than Wawrinka because Wawrinka has one more slam and one more masters title than Delpo? Sounds like ranking based on titles to me.
I thought Cilic was unbeatable at the US open but now he is last on this list?
The non-Big-4 Slam winners of recent times.
Rank their peak level...
To me Wawrinka's "peak" still showed weakness. His victories weren't the most straight forward and sometimes looked on a fragile balance that could tip at any time. Throughout the final with Djokovic it still looked like it could go either way but Wawrinka played the huge points brilliantly when they counted at sets 5-4 or 4-4. But this was no different from what Murray did the match previous to go 5 sets especially when he broke at the end of the 3rd.
Cilic was one of the most steadiest, composed performances in tennis history. He looked so in control from the QF to the end he just looked impossible to stop.
I think this is a perceptive point, and I tend to agree.
Wawrinka's peak is certainly brutal in a way, especially seeing a man barely 6 foot bash a ball like that. But he has also seemed slightly more fragile during his peak runs—comparatively.
Cilic looked like he would waver for no man. Not an inch.
I think Cilic played weaker opponents though. Berdych, Nishikori, and Federer were all noticeably below par in their matches against Cilic IMO, for one reason or another.
I think Cilic played weaker opponents though. Berdych, Nishikori, and Federer were all noticeably below par in their matches against Cilic IMO, for one reason or another.
I also agree because you have to give the edge to Wawrinka movement which is better than Del Potro
I am not even sure Del Potro serves better than Wawrinka (maybe slightly better but Wawinka serve is underrated IMO)
I also give the edge to Wawrinka in the net game department
what can work against a zoning Del Potro is slice your backhand on the argentinan backhand (and that's why i still don't get why Federer lost that US open final)
Against Wawrinka not too sure, you just have to make sure he doesn't get into position to hit the ball hard :lol:
What about forehand?
del Potro is light years ahead at it's peak
To me Wawrinka's "peak" still showed weakness. His victories weren't the most straight forward and sometimes looked on a fragile balance that could tip at any time. Throughout the final with Djokovic it still looked like it could go either way but Wawrinka played the huge points brilliantly when they counted at sets 5-4 or 4-4. But this was no different from what Murray did the match previous to go 5 sets especially when he broke at the end of the 3rd.
Cilic was one of the most steadiest, composed performances in tennis history. He looked so in control from the QF to the end he just looked impossible to stop.