Safin not the most overrated player, Nalbandian is

[NadalAgassi]

I cant believe anyone would call Safin the most overrated player. Granted he is overrated at times on this forum but the man is still a champion. 2 slam titles beating arguably the 2 best players in the Open Era and the #1 ranking.

The real most overrated player is clearly Nalbandian. Nonsense statements like Nalbandian being more talented than Federer and Nadal, Nalbandian owning Federer, Nalbandian having had the potential to dominate the game, and other such nonsense. The guy has only 1 slam final, and it was way back in 2002, and it was on his worst surface by far and a bigtime fluke. Surprisngly he has never made a slam final on one of his good surfaces. His records against Federer and Nadal are impressive considering they are superior to him as a player by an enormous margin, and by far the most impressive aspect of his otherwise only moderately good career. Still it it not like he has ever beaten Federer in near god mode like Safin has done, I highly doubt he would be capable of doing so even at his best. Federer and Nalbandian both playing their best, not just fairly well or ok but at their best, Federer would win every single time and I am no Federer fan. Murray has a much better head to head with Federer than Nalbandian (a winning one, not a losing one)but we dont hear him praised for it in nearly the same way. And Nalbandian is lucky he has barely played Nadal, and never on grass or clay where he would be walloped 10 times out of 10. He still has losing records against nearly all top players, many of whom own him.

Nalbandian is nowhere near as great, as talented, or as worthy of such over the top praise as what he gets on this forum. I should word it that he is only the most overrated player on this forum though. In the real World he is rated about right, and tennis experts hardly ever talk about him, even when he was a top 10 player he was a bit figure in their eyes, which is accurate to what he was.

 

[djokovic2008]

I cant believe anyone would call Safin the most overrated player. Granted he is overrated at times on this forum but the man is still a champion. 2 slam titles beating arguably the 2 best players in the Open Era and the #1 ranking.

The real most overrated player is clearly Nalbandian. Nonsense statements like Nalbandian being more talented than Federer and Nadal, Nalbandian owning Federer, Nalbandian having had the potential to dominate the game, and other such nonsense. The guy has only 1 slam final, and it was way back in 2002, and it was on his worst surface by far and a bigtime fluke. Surprisngly he has never made a slam final on one of his good surfaces. His records against Federer and Nadal are impressive considering they are superior to him as a player by an enormous margin, and by far the most impressive aspect of his otherwise only moderately good career. Still it it not like he has ever beaten Federer in near god mode like Safin has done, I highly doubt he would be capable of doing so even at his best. Federer and Nalbandian both playing their best, not just fairly well or ok but at their best, Federer would win every single time and I am no Federer fan. Murray has a much better head to head with Federer than Nalbandian (a winning one, not a losing one)but we dont hear him praised for it in nearly the same way. And Nalbandian is lucky he has barely played Nadal, and never on grass or clay where he would be walloped 10 times out of 10. He still has losing records against nearly all top players, many of whom own him.

Nalbandian is nowhere near as great, as talented, or as worthy of such over the top praise as what he gets on this forum. I should word it that he is only the most overrated player on this forum though. In the real World he is rated about right, and tennis experts hardly ever talk about him, even when he was a top 10 player he was a bit figure in their eyes, which is accurate to what he was.

Its easy just to say a guy has more titles so therefore he is better but in life everything is no so black and white. Im a djoker fan but as a tennis fan I can appreciate that if nalbandian actually worked as hard as he could this guy would of been great. One of the best backhands possible plus a great return game too, his fellow pros always mention how great he is.

 

[Ripster]

He's overrated because people like myself know how talented he is and yet never achieved the results he deserved. Semi's of all four grandslams and a WTF is impressive but ending his career with 0 slams has to be the biggest disappointment in tennis.

He's a massive waste of talent and people wanted to see him win grand slams and knew he had the potential to do it. After Federer lost to him handily twice in '07 he asked where Nalbandian was the rest of the season. The problem is he just doesn't care enough and it says something when a guy like Roddick can have a better career with a much more limited skill-set. Nalbandian will probably go down as one of the best players to have never won a slam.

 

[fps]

Its easy just to say a guy has more titles so therefore he is better but in life everything is no so black and white. Im a djoker fan but as a tennis fan I can appreciate that if nalbandian actually worked as hard as he could this guy would of been great. One of the best backhands possible plus a great return game too, his fellow pros always mention how great he is.

Yeah he has a lot of respect from fellow pros on tour, and they know a thing or two, plus he hits so cleanly, his ability to redirect the ball, that backhand, mark him out as having amazing, AMAZING hand-eye coordination. Definitely one of the most "naturally" gifted players of the last ten years.

 

[NadalAgassi]

He's overrated because people like myself know how talented he is and yet never achieved the results he deserved. Semi's of all four grandslams and a WTF is impressive but ending his career with 0 slams has to be the biggest disappointment in tennis.

He's a massive waste of talent and people wanted to see him win grand slams and knew he had the potential to do it. After Federer lost to him handily twice in '07 he asked where Nalbandian was the rest of the season. The problem is he just doesn't care enough and it says something when a guy like Roddick can have a better career with a much more limited skill-set. Nalbandian will probably go down as one of the best players to have never won a slam.

Tons of pros are overall more talented than Roddick, not just Nalbandian. Roddick however is immensely talented in the most talented aspect of the sport. The serve. So he isnt really a good reference point.

I dont know why one would assume Nalbandian was better than Roddick or should have been better. At the 2003 U.S Open which people love to bring up Roddick played his worst match of the summer by far, Nalbandian was playing his best tennis, and the out of form Roddick still found a way to come back and win from down a match point in the 3rd set to the extremely in form Nalbandian. Their matches before that were beatdowns. Their last couple Nalbandian won since Roddick forgot how to hit a forehand and adopted the serve and push mentality.

 

[Carsomyr]

Why would Safin be overrated? His love for the sea puts him squarely in the upper echelon IMO.

 

[Ripster]

Tons of pros are overall more talented than Roddick, not just Nalbandian. Roddick however is immensely talented in the most talented aspect of the sport. The serve. So he isnt really a good reference point.

I dont know why one would assume Nalbandian was better than Roddick or should have been better. At the 2003 U.S Open which people love to bring up Roddick played his worst match of the summer by far, Nalbandian was playing his best tennis, and the out of form Roddick still found a way to come back and win from down a match point in the 3rd set to the extremely in form Nalbandian. Their matches before that were beatdowns. Their last couple Nalbandian won since Roddick forgot how to hit a forehand and adopted the serve and push mentality.

An out of form Roddick? The summer of 2003 was Roddick's best span of tennis in his career. He won Cincinnati, Toronto (beating Federer) and then won the US Open - he was playing the best tennis of his career and he still should of lost to Nalbandian in that semi-final. Had Nalbandian won one more point he definitely would have beat a gassed Ferrero in the final.

 

[NadalAgassi]

An out of form Roddick? The summer of 2003 was Roddick's best span of tennis in his career. He won Cincinnati, Toronto (beating Federer) and then won the US Open - he was playing the best tennis of his career and he still should of lost to Nalbandian in that semi-final. Had Nalbandian won one more point he definitely would have beat a gassed Ferrero in the final.

I am talking about his play that day, especialy relative to how he was normally playing around then. Roddick that day was playing his worst match of the summer by far. McEnroe and Carillo felt the same way and were shocked at his "lackluster" performance. Nalbandian was playing his best tennis that day. Despite this Roddick still fought back to win. By contrast in a match Roddick was playing his best and Nalbandian was playing bad earlier that summer Nalbandian got only 3 games in the Canadian Masters final.

When Roddick had his old forehand he was too much for Nalbandian. Their other 2 matches in 02 and 03 Nalbandian was badly spanked.

It doesnt matter if Roddick is less talented overall. His serve is worth more than most peoples whole games put together, and when Roddick had his serve AND forehand both working he was much tougher to beat than Nalbandian ever was. That is why Roddick ended a year #1 over a prime Federer, something Nalbandian would never be capable of. And Roddick's streak of winning Toronto-Cincy-U.S Open all in a row easily eclipses Nalbandian's Madrid-Paris double which is some peoples example of Nalbandian being the so called uncrowned GOAT, more talented than Federer, and all the other nonsense.

 

[Mustard]

I am talking about his play that day, especialy relative to how he was normally playing around then. Roddick that day was playing his worst match of the summer by far. McEnroe and Carillo felt the same way and were shocked at his "lackluster" performance. Nalbandian was playing his best tennis that day. Despite this Roddick still fought back to win.

Roddick was outplayed by Nalbandian right up until Nalbandian's match point and the controversial "out" call from someone in the crowd at 7-7 in that third set tiebreak. Nalbandian just didn't allow Roddick to play well up until that point. The fourth set saw Nalbandian go into a slump while Roddick got more confident, but the fifth set saw Nalbandian recover his composure. Roddick broke Nalbandian to go 5-3 up and serve for the match thanks to a very controversial sideline call. It clearly caught the line but was called "out". That 2003 US Open semi final match was controversial to say the very least.

 

[fps]

An out of form Roddick? The summer of 2003 was Roddick's best span of tennis in his career. He won Cincinnati, Toronto (beating Federer) and then won the US Open - he was playing the best tennis of his career and he still should of lost to Nalbandian in that semi-final. Had Nalbandian won one more point he definitely would have beat a gassed Ferrero in the final.

Should of doesn't count. No-one hands you a trophy cos you "should of" beaten someone. It's also not a good argument when trying to prove that the player who lost is better than the player who won.

 

[Ripster]

I am talking about his play that day, especialy relative to how he was normally playing around then. Roddick that day was playing his worst match of the summer by far. McEnroe and Carillo felt the same way and were shocked at his "lackluster" performance. Nalbandian was playing his best tennis that day. Despite this Roddick still fought back to win. By contrast in a match Roddick was playing his best and Nalbandian was playing bad earlier that summer Nalbandian got only 3 games in the Canadian Masters final.

When Roddick had his old forehand he was too much for Nalbandian. Their other 2 matches in 02 and 03 Nalbandian was badly spanked.

It doesnt matter if Roddick is less talented overall. His serve is worth more than most peoples whole games put together, and when Roddick had his serve AND forehand both working he was much tougher to beat than Nalbandian ever was. That is why Roddick ended a year #1 over a prime Federer, something Nalbandian would never be capable of. And Roddick's streak of winning Toronto-Cincy-U.S Open all in a row easily eclipses Nalbandian's Madrid-Paris double which is some peoples example of Nalbandian being the so called uncrowned GOAT, more talented than Federer, and all the other nonsense.

McEnroe and Carillo making excuses for an American player losing that's a big surprise. I'm not arguing that Nalbandian had a better career than Roddick which I already conceded. We both agree that Nalbandian is more talented and could have achieved so much more with a harder work ethic (like Roddick).

He's overrated because people know he had the potential to win grand slams. He has arguably the best two-handed backhand of all time. And because he takes the ball early and controls the rallies against even the best players in the world. Federer himself said that he hates playing Nalbandian because he takes the ball on the rise and puts Federer on the defensive. Same goes for Nadal.

I brought up Roddick because he's such a contrast to Nalby. Nalbandian is completely superior from the back court and even at net and yet Roddick has a winning record against him and has won a slam. Even Djokovic who is also superior from the back court has a losing record against Roddick. The fact that Hewitt has 2 slams says it all. Just goes to show that hard work in tennis is > talent if you aren't committed.

 

[CDestroyer]

McEnroe and Carillo making excuses for an American player losing that's a big surprise. I'm not arguing that Nalbandian had a better career than Roddick which I already conceded. We both agree that Nalbandian is more talented and could have achieved so much more with a harder work ethic (like Roddick).

He's overrated because people know he had the potential to win grand slams. He has arguably the best two-handed backhand of all time. And because he takes the ball early and controls the rallies against even the best players in the world. Federer himself said that he hates playing Nalbandian because he takes the ball on the rise and puts Federer on the defensive. Same goes for Nadal.

I brought up Roddick because he's such a contrast to Nalby. Nalbandian is completely superior from the back court and even at net and yet Roddick has a winning record against him and has won a slam. Even Djokovic who is also superior from the back court has a losing record against Roddick. The fact that Hewitt has 2 slams says it all. Just goes to show that hard work in tennis is > talent if you aren't committed.

You have made some excellent posts in this thread man. Well done.

 

[NadalAgassi]

McEnroe and Carillo making excuses for an American player losing that's a big surprise.

They werent making excuses. They were criticizing Roddick's performance. I watched the whole match and agreed with them. Nalbandian really brought his A-game that day, but Roddick played quite poorly for his standards at the time. Despite that Roddick won.

BTW Roddick had many more winners and errors in the match which shows it was much more about how Roddick was playing than Nalbandian.

You did not even acknowledge my point that Roddick had killed Nalbandian in their other two matches at the time, which also suggests Nalbandian had to play up and Roddick play down for it to be even competitive between them at the time.

I'm not arguing that Nalbandian had a better career than Roddick which I already conceded. We both agree that Nalbandian is more talented and could have achieved so much more with a harder work ethic (like Roddick).

There are many players who are overall more talented than Roddick who did worse than Roddick. Aside from Roddick's hard work and determination, he is one of the most talented of the past decade at the most important part of the sport- the serve. Many of the more balanced talents would probably be better off having Roddick's serve instead.

There are also many guys who never won a slam who had the potential to possibly win 1 or 2. That isnt an overly unique trait either.

He's overrated because people know he had the potential to win grand slams. He has arguably the best two-handed backhand of all time.

He definitely does not have the best two handed backhand of all time. It is a great shot but better than Agassi, Connors, Safin at his best, and quite a few others, no way.

He had potential to win 1 or 2 slams and have a Roddick or Hewitt like career perhaps. That is all. He was far from the uncrowned GOAT, the guy who could have been better than Federer and the other nonsense BS that he is referred to by many on this forum, but in the real World would be laughed at.

I brought up Roddick because he's such a contrast to Nalby. Nalbandian is completely superior from the back court and even at net and yet Roddick has a winning record against him and has won a slam. Even Djokovic who is also superior from the back court has a losing record against Roddick. The fact that Hewitt has 2 slams says it all. Just goes to show that hard work in tennis is > talent if you aren't committed.

Once again many guys are superior to Roddick from the backcourt and net both, especialy since he lost his forehand. Roddick has the dominant serve and that backed up with a good but not great game has carried his career.

As for Hewitt in his prime he was an outstanding player with one of the best returns, passing shots, he was at the time the fastest player out there. And he embarassed Nalbandian in his only slam final. He also was lucky to peak at a weak transition period.

 

[Mustard]

He also was lucky to peak at a weak transition period.

On the contrary, he was unlucky to peak in the early years of prime Federer.

 

[Tammo]

yeah, If Nalbandian didn't have Fed then he could have a few slams.

 

[Breaker]

yeah, If Nalbandian didn't have Fed then he could have a few slams.

Federer had very little to do with it unlike Roddick and Hewitt. Nalby only lost to Fed in 2 important slam matches at AO quarterfinals and RG semifinals. Even without Federer I don't see him winning either - he's not beating Hewitt or probably even tired Safin at Aussie Open and isn't beating Nadal at RG.

 

[Mustard]

Nalbandian's best chances to win a major were at the 2003 US Open and the 2006 Australian Open, even though he got to the 2002 Wimbledon final. He was being talked about a lot for the 2008 Australian Open as well, considering his awesome 2007 Madrid and Paris Indoor tournaments.

 

[ollinger]

A multiple-slam winner cannot easily be overrated.

 

[_maxi]

I agree with almost everything except for this......

Still it it not like he has ever beaten Federer in near god mode like Safin has done

Has to be a joke. Nalb played god mode in 2005 WTF and 2007 paris and madrid.

And... something people use to forget. Nalbandian kicked fed out of AO and USO in 2003.... if it wasn't by him, maybe we could have federer with 18 slams by now.

And he has along with safin, the best 2hbh the game has seen. Don't tell me agassi's one was better. Nalbo overplayed Agassi to the backhand everytime they played.

 

[Dimitrov]

I would agree with you on that Nalbandian is so talented and men when he hits those backhands clean there like bullets

 

[fps]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IUAzGS2lSE

just seeing this for the first time, i don't even know who won this match, it's good!!

 

[Achilles82]

Safin, former world No1, played more then 40 grand slams in his carrier, and only 9 times he passed 4th round. That's embarrassing.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I agree with almost everything except for this......

Has to be a joke. Nalb played god mode in 2005 WTF and 2007 paris and madrid.

I am not talking about Nalbandian's performance in my initial post. No doubt Nalbandian was playing his A+ game those days. Federer though was not playing in god mode in any of those matches. He arguably played pretty well in a couple of them, but that is it. By contrast when Federer lost to Safin at the 2005 Australian Open he was playing unbelievably well, one of his best matches ever, and still lost. You cant honestly say that about any of his losses to Nalbandian (I am not saying he played poorly, but he clearly wasnt in god mode, yet Safin did beat Federer in god mode).

And... something people use to forget. Nalbandian kicked fed out of AO and USO in 2003.... if it wasn't by him, maybe we could have federer with 18 slams by now.

I will give you that the U.S Open in 2003 was a big win. Australian Open 2003 wasnt. Federer had lost in the 1st or 4th round of 7 slams in a row from 2001 U.S Open-2003 French Open, usually to players much worse than Nalbandian. In slams he was a nobody at that point. And Agassi would have slammed Federer at the 2003 Australian had he somehow made the final.

And he has along with safin, the best 2hbh the game has seen. Don't tell me agassi's one was better. Nalbo overplayed Agassi to the backhand everytime they played.

Agassi and Nalbandian only played a single match. And in that lone match Agassi was THIRTY THREE years old. I would hope you arent wanting people to evaluate Nalbandian or your other favorites at 33. And while I didnt see that particular match 33 year old Agassi was the winner of that lone meeting:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N301&oId=A092

 

[Feña14]

It's Del Potro for me, to be fair to him most people don't, but i've seen him get way over-hyped on the boards.

 

[fps]

It's Del Potro for me, to be fair to him most people don't, but i've seen him get way over-hyped on the boards.

He will prove himself the real deal, multiple slam winner, world no.1, IMO.

 

[NamRanger]

I cant believe anyone would call Safin the most overrated player. Granted he is overrated at times on this forum but the man is still a champion. 2 slam titles beating arguably the 2 best players in the Open Era and the #1 ranking.

The real most overrated player is clearly Nalbandian. Nonsense statements like Nalbandian being more talented than Federer and Nadal, Nalbandian owning Federer, Nalbandian having had the potential to dominate the game, and other such nonsense. The guy has only 1 slam final, and it was way back in 2002, and it was on his worst surface by far and a bigtime fluke. Surprisngly he has never made a slam final on one of his good surfaces. His records against Federer and Nadal are impressive considering they are superior to him as a player by an enormous margin, and by far the most impressive aspect of his otherwise only moderately good career. Still it it not like he has ever beaten Federer in near god mode like Safin has done, I highly doubt he would be capable of doing so even at his best. Federer and Nalbandian both playing their best, not just fairly well or ok but at their best, Federer would win every single time and I am no Federer fan. Murray has a much better head to head with Federer than Nalbandian (a winning one, not a losing one)but we dont hear him praised for it in nearly the same way. And Nalbandian is lucky he has barely played Nadal, and never on grass or clay where he would be walloped 10 times out of 10. He still has losing records against nearly all top players, many of whom own him.

Nalbandian is nowhere near as great, as talented, or as worthy of such over the top praise as what he gets on this forum. I should word it that he is only the most overrated player on this forum though. In the real World he is rated about right, and tennis experts hardly ever talk about him, even when he was a top 10 player he was a bit figure in their eyes, which is accurate to what he was.

Rios had Nalbandian beat by a clear country mile in terms of overratedness. At least Nalbandian beat legitimately good players. Rios was beating up on guys like Rusedski and Henman.

 

[Mustard]

Rios had Nalbandian beat by a clear country mile in terms of overratedness. At least Nalbandian beat legitimately good players. Rios was beating up on guys like Rusedski and Henman.

Rios beat up on a guy like Agassi.

 

[NamRanger]

Rios beat up on a guy like Agassi.

That was coming off the biggest slump of his career?


The H2H was 2-1 and neither guy had a real significant advantage over the other. I'd hardly call a 5 set win at the YEC "beating up" btw.

 

[abmk]

That was coming off the biggest slump of his career?


The H2H was 2-1 and neither guy had a real significant advantage over the other. I'd hardly call a 5 set win at the YEC "beating up" btw.

If you'd watched, you'd know how rios was toying around with him and beating him at his own game to speak , especially their miami match in 98. The 3rd match, IIRC, rios had to retire ...

 

[callmethedoctor]

McEnroe and Carillo making excuses for an American player losing that's a big surprise. I'm not arguing that Nalbandian had a better career than Roddick which I already conceded. We both agree that Nalbandian is more talented and could have achieved so much more with a harder work ethic (like Roddick).

He's overrated because people know he had the potential to win grand slams. He has arguably the best two-handed backhand of all time. And because he takes the ball early and controls the rallies against even the best players in the world. Federer himself said that he hates playing Nalbandian because he takes the ball on the rise and puts Federer on the defensive. Same goes for Nadal.

I brought up Roddick because he's such a contrast to Nalby. Nalbandian is completely superior from the back court and even at net and yet Roddick has a winning record against him and has won a slam. Even Djokovic who is also superior from the back court has a losing record against Roddick. The fact that Hewitt has 2 slams says it all. Just goes to show that hard work in tennis is > talent if you aren't committed.

I would hate to play that guy too, jeezus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChqLtLPCecg

 

[NamRanger]

If you'd watched, you'd know how rios was toying around with him and beating him at his own game to speak , especially their miami match in 98. The 3rd match, IIRC, rios had to retire ...

Rios was toying a guy that was making a comeback after his biggest slump of his career. Really? Is that supposed to be impressive?



The 3rd match Rios did retire, after Agassi took the 2nd. Agassi also barely lost at the YEC. There was no real owning at all.

 

[abmk]

Rios was toying a guy that was making a comeback after his biggest slump of his career. Really? Is that supposed to be impressive?



The 3rd match Rios did retire, after Agassi took the 2nd. Agassi also barely lost at the YEC. There was no real owning at all.

agassi was playing some good tennis going into the miami final tbh. Look I rate nalbandian better than rios and nalby did beat better players more often, but if you watch those matches, you'd know how well rios handled agassi ...

 

[egn]

An out of form Roddick? The summer of 2003 was Roddick's best span of tennis in his career. He won Cincinnati, Toronto (beating Federer) and then won the US Open - he was playing the best tennis of his career and he still should of lost to Nalbandian in that semi-final. Had Nalbandian won one more point he definitely would have beat a gassed Ferrero in the final.

Roddick was outplayed by Nalbandian right up until Nalbandian's match point and the controversial "out" call from someone in the crowd at 7-7 in that third set tiebreak. Nalbandian just didn't allow Roddick to play well up until that point. The fourth set saw Nalbandian go into a slump while Roddick got more confident, but the fifth set saw Nalbandian recover his composure. Roddick broke Nalbandian to go 5-3 up and serve for the match thanks to a very controversial sideline call. It clearly caught the line but was called "out". That 2003 US Open semi final match was controversial to say the very least.

Gosh get off Roddick's back everyone. This adds to my frustration, let us all relive a moment of history okay.

Go here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI

Serve starts at 8:30
Ball hits sideline at 8:34
Roddick makes contact with ball at 8:35 a fraction of a second later ball is called out
Nalbandian then starts his take back and goes through with a standard forehand.

Nalbandian had he really though said point was out why did he even bother swinging at it? If his ball had been out the POINT IS OVER. He should have not taken a shot to begin with. Also on the numerous comments that it was a fan who made the call then just play the point. Which it was clear. I'm sorry watching it on tv it was clearly a fan screamed it out and Nalbandian took the shot on the ball.

Second of all it was not on Nalbandian's match point. It was on a 7all that gave Roddick a set point. Nalbandian did not have a match point at that moment in time.

Thirdly if you can't close out a match from 2 sets to 1 when you have been "outplaying" the guy all day you don't deserve the match. Roddick has had bull happen to him and flaked out and still hung on to win matches.

Stop hating on Roddick it was not his fault that the fan screamed and start accepting the truth that Nalbandian was never built to handle the pressure of the big stage.

 

[Feña14]

He will prove himself the real deal, multiple slam winner, world no.1, IMO.

And you're entitled to it

After Murray's loss to Nadal at Wimbledon I saw alot of posts about it being del Potro as the final member of the big 4, and that he is a huge contender for the US Open. Murray has won twice as many titles, 6 times the number of Masters events, he's beaten him whenever they have played in the biggest matches etc.. To me, del Potro dines off the back-to-back wins over Federer and Nadal at the US Open, that's always impressive, but Nadal was injured and Federer really fell apart after the first set which he dominated.

What i'm saying is that it's possible for very good players to play lights out for 2 days, all credit to him for that. For him to be hyped as much as he is, he needs to of done more than that weekend, imo.

 

[Mustard]

That was coming off the biggest slump of his career?

Agassi hit rock bottom on the 10th November 1997, when his ranking was at 141 in the world. Agassi was super motivated from that point on after Brad Gilbert told him to work his way back up or quit the game. Going into the 1998 Miami final against Rios, Agassi had won 18 of his last 19 matches, which included 2 tournaments. He was back in pretty good form.

The H2H was 2-1 and neither guy had a real significant advantage over the other. I'd hardly call a 5 set win at the YEC "beating up" btw.

Rios played the 1998 Grand Slam Cup final with a back injury. As for the 2002 Miami semi final, Rios again had more numerous injury problems by that point and still pushed Agassi to the limit before he had to retire from the match with it tied at 1 set a piece.

 

[Mustard]

Gosh get off Roddick's back everyone. This adds to my frustration, let us all relive a moment of history okay.

Go here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI

Serve starts at 8:30
Ball hits sideline at 8:34
Roddick makes contact with ball at 8:35 a fraction of a second later ball is called out
Nalbandian then starts his take back and goes through with a standard forehand.

Nalbandian had he really though said point was out why did he even bother swinging at it? If his ball had been out the POINT IS OVER. He should have not taken a shot to begin with. Also on the numerous comments that it was a fan who made the call then just play the point. Which it was clear. I'm sorry watching it on tv it was clearly a fan screamed it out and Nalbandian took the shot on the ball.

Second of all it was not on Nalbandian's match point. It was on a 7all that gave Roddick a set point. Nalbandian did not have a match point at that moment in time.

I said it was someone in the crowd who called "out" during that 7-7 point, and I never said it was on Nalbandian's match point. I said that Nalbandian had outplayed Roddick up until he had match point and until someone called "out" from the crowd during that 7-7 point in the tiebreak.

Thirdly if you can't close out a match from 2 sets to 1 when you have been "outplaying" the guy all day you don't deserve the match. Roddick has had bull happen to him and flaked out and still hung on to win matches.

As I said, Nalbandian had a slump in the fourth set, but he did recover his composure in the fifth set, until this happened at 3-4 break point down in the fifth set:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMwYB1BwFNA

Roddick won the match and that's what matters, but it was controversial.

Stop hating on Roddick it was not his fault that the fan screamed and start accepting the truth that Nalbandian was never built to handle the pressure of the big stage.

I'm not "hating on" Roddick. I just remember the bitter taste the match left in my mouth.

 

[Tsonga#1fan]

it's a coin flip between those two and Hewitt

 

[Mustard]

it's a coin flip between those two and Hewitt

Hewitt is very underrated. He's made out by some people to be a soft, weakling pusher who just took advantage of a brief transitional era. Laughable.

 

[fps]

And you're entitled to it

After Murray's loss to Nadal at Wimbledon I saw alot of posts about it being del Potro as the final member of the big 4, and that he is a huge contender for the US Open. Murray has won twice as many titles, 6 times the number of Masters events, he's beaten him whenever they have played in the biggest matches etc.. To me, del Potro dines off the back-to-back wins over Federer and Nadal at the US Open, that's always impressive, but Nadal was injured and Federer really fell apart after the first set which he dominated.

What i'm saying is that it's possible for very good players to play lights out for 2 days, all credit to him for that. For him to be hyped as much as he is, he needs to of done more than that weekend, imo.

It's a fair point, although I suppose your argument is a little like "he's not good enough until he's proved that he's good enough". His match against Rafa at Wimbledon DP played like a champion, a man who believed he could win right to the last point, whereas Murray threw points away left right and centre and collapsed. At 22 Del Potro knows his own game, and he has the mechanics and the heavy artillery. Murray only has one of those three things IMO.

 

[IvanisevicServe]

Well, he's certainly not the "uncrowned GOAT" or anything of that nature, but the guy was a supremely talented player who was one of the few capable of giving Federer a run for his money (and even beating him) when Federer was in his prime and playing well. He really blew it when he blew the two set lead on Baghdatis in the 06 AO semi...coming off the victory over Federer in the Masters Cup final, he would've had a real chance against Federer in the AO final.

I haven't seen anyone around here talking about Nalbandian like he should've been a #1 or an 8-10 slam winner, so I wouldn't say he's the most overrated at all.

For me, it's Gasquet. All the "Baby Fed" hype and constant complaints of his underachieving...just because he has a breathtaking backhand doesn't mean he should be a Top 5 player/winning slams. I think he's right about where he should be. A Top 15, Top 20 player who is always dangerous but just doesn't have the all-around ability to be at the very top.

 

[mcr619619]

not overrated, but 0 slam has been a dissappointment, he's my 2nd fave player after fed in his peak time

 

[Mikael]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IUAzGS2lSE

just seeing this for the first time, i don't even know who won this match, it's good!!

Thanks for the link, I remember watching this match back in 06. Great match from Safin not so much in terms of level of play, but he was able to maintain his composure throughout the 5 sets. So many times he would have tanked the 5th set after letting Nalbandian back from 2 sets down.

This is the one to check out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCEJQ0NEe4Y
On the point starting at 3'22'' Safin hits maybe the winner of the year!

 

[Tammo]

I've always thoight Safin and Nalbandian are the same. Each had tons of talent, but didn't physically get in shape.

 

[All-rounder]

It's Del Potro for me, to be fair to him most people don't, but i've seen him get way over-hyped on the boards.

Del potro more overrated than Nalbandian?? At least he has a major under his belt and is only 22yrs old unlike nalby who's career is coming to an end with 0 slams.

 

[fps]

I've always thoight Safin and Nalbandian are the same. Each had tons of talent, but didn't physically get in shape.

Safin was a strong guy, 6-4 190lbs or so, he got bigger in later years cos the problems with his knee affected his training and also caused a lack of motivation.

 

[Feña14]

Del potro more overrated than Nalbandian?? At least he has a major under his belt and is only 22yrs old unlike nalby who's career is coming to an end with 0 slams.

Yup. Nalbandian hasn't really been hyped up or talked about for the last few years, del Potro has. I like both their games and hope del Potro can win more majors, but for now I see the hype around him to be greater than what he's achieved on court.

 

[fps]

Thanks for the link, I remember watching this match back in 06. Great match from Safin not so much in terms of level of play, but he was able to maintain his composure throughout the 5 sets. So many times he would have tanked the 5th set after letting Nalbandian back from 2 sets down.

This is the one to check out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCEJQ0NEe4Y
On the point starting at 3'22'' Safin hits maybe the winner of the year!

oh yeah sick winner love it!

 

[NadalAgassi]

And you're entitled to it

After Murray's loss to Nadal at Wimbledon I saw alot of posts about it being del Potro as the final member of the big 4, and that he is a huge contender for the US Open. Murray has won twice as many titles, 6 times the number of Masters events, he's beaten him whenever they have played in the biggest matches etc.. To me, del Potro dines off the back-to-back wins over Federer and Nadal at the US Open, that's always impressive, but Nadal was injured and Federer really fell apart after the first set which he dominated.

What i'm saying is that it's possible for very good players to play lights out for 2 days, all credit to him for that. For him to be hyped as much as he is, he needs to of done more than that weekend, imo.

Nadal was never beating Del Potro in that U.S Open semifinal even healthy. It was a total beatdown. I agree Federer should have won the final, he blew that 2nd set where he had so many leads and chances, and gave up the momentum and total control of the match he had which would have no doubt otherwise led to a straight set win. Once given the reprieve though Del Potro displayed his full skill and overpowered Federer. It was a switch from their FO match which Del Potro should have won in straights but unlucky to lose the 2nd set.

I agree Del Potro overall is overrated and overhyped right now though. He has only won 1 title bigger than a 500, not even a Masters. People keep saying 2009 Del Potro like he dominated the game, but he won 1 big title (including Masters), couldnt even beat Davydenko to win the WTF, got owned by Murray throughout the year, was fed two bagels by Federer at the Aussie Open, and ended the year at #5.

 

[Comet Buster]

I've always thoight Safin and Nalbandian are the same. Each had tons of talent, but didn't physically get in shape.

Do you even believe youeself???



Safin was injury prone, yes. But you are completely wrong about Safin 'not getting into good physical shape'. He got into great shape at the Australian open 2004 - where he missed most of 2003 - came back and beat Roddick and Agassi in 5 sets, and played other physically demanding matches. He also got into great shape at the start of 2005 - winning long matches against Federer and Hewitt. Completely clueless; Safin has won many grueling epics. Even against the greatest players ever.


Nalbandian is also fitter than people say. He's got a bit of a gut. That's all. You can still have a tummy and be fit at the same time. Heck I smoke/drink yet I'm pin-thin. I'm not 1/50th as fit as tennis players.

 

[Julian12]

Nalbandian arbuabably had better touch at net than Federer, Watch his matches, and you see he prolly had. Nalbandian arguably had better groundstrokes off of both wings, when playing well ofcause, just like with the touch. Nalbandian arguably had a better topspin lob than Federer. BUT. However
Fed def had a better serve than Nalbandian, def had a better slice, or used it more often, Fed def had a better training regime and Work ethics, Fed def had better mental stamina as he could always come up with a good serve when needet, Fed def had the ability to win the RIGHT points rather than just playing ridiculous tennis when on the way to have a big lead, or be vastly behind in a match. Nalbandian had than ability, but NOT to win the right points like the champions has, also due to their mental game.
To sum it up, Fed has amazing feel and an amazing game, but Nalbandian when playing his best simply had the more capable game i think, maybe all this is due to me not being fan of Feds serve second ball, slice and so, forehand midcourt - Smash plays. The plays we know he can play, but maybe it´s me having watched too much Fed, i know his game in and out almost, but one thing is for sure, Nalbandian is "overrated" for a reason in here, he was def three a generation talent, along with Federer and Safin I think.