Safin or Hewitt?

[SoBad]

u don't like hewitt do u?

No, I do like Hewitt actually, but since Safin is the best I voted for him in this thread. With the comment about South America I was merely pointing out that unlike Safin, Hewitt is a controversial figure with the tennis fans and is unlikely to be making nearly as much money in endorsements.

 

[justineheninhoogenbandfan]

Fixed your list:

Federer = Becker
Roddick = Ivanisevic
Nadal = Chang
Nalbandian = Agassi
Safin = Stich
Davydenko = Kafelnikov
Hewitt = ???? Reminds me of Wilander, but that's not last generation.

It goes without saying that not all of these are improved models. Also not sure if Safin and Hewitt should be considered "top men" at this point. Sampras doesn't really have a correlary ATM, and probably never will since serve and volley is pretty much dead and I don't see much that's gonna bring it back with how fast the balls move these days.

How do you equate Federer and Becker? Federer is much more of a baseline type player then Becker was. Also if you mean the Becker of 93-97 Federer's ground game, return game, and mobiilty were light years better, his serve was atleast as strong, and only his net game was maybe a bit behind but not much. Federer of today is much better then Becker during the Sampras reign.

 

[Zuras]

How do you equate Federer and Becker? Federer is much more of a baseline type player then Becker was. Also if you mean the Becker of 93-97 Federer's ground game, return game, and mobiilty were light years better, his serve was atleast as strong, and only his net game was maybe a bit behind but not much. Federer of today is much better then Becker during the Sampras reign.

Cause Becker is the player that, as a total package, Federer is closest to? Federer is basically a Becker with better footwork and court coverage.

 

[psamp14]

yes i agree...you were very generous to nalbandian

the rest of them, to me, are good comparions regarding styles of play

but federer=becker? nadal=chang?

federer is much more of a all courter than becker...becker was much of a volleyer

nadal isnt like chang...he is more aggressive than chang..hewitt is very much like chang

davydenko playing week after week is like kafelnikov though

you think davydenko could retire and play poker and become as fat as kafelnikov as become?

i could hardly recognize kafelnikov when i saw him, i think it was during davis cup when i saw him on tv...

 

[Gemini]

Well..my list is subjective but it is based on more than just the players physical style of game. I look at the player's current accomplishments, potential future accomplishments, style of game and intangibles (affect on other players for example). Hence, I stand by:

Federer = Sampras (Dominant, fluid players. Often have the edge in matches simply on reputation and presence on court. It's good for a few points here and there are against the majority of players. The intimidation factor. Also, talked about potentially be the greatest of all time which Becker is not even thought of.)

Safin = Ivanisevic ( Both highly talented players capable of beating the best when they're on but both psychologically "unstable". Big servers with the potential to do some real damage if they bring a complete person to the court. Safin, currently, has one more major than Ivanisevic.)

Hewitt = Chang (Both rely on strong groudstrokes and footwork to do the damage. Hewitt's slightly taller, more proficient at net and with one more singles major than Chang. Hewitt's also captured the no. 1 rank where Chang has only ascended as high as no. 2.)

Nadal = Muster (Both claycourt dominators that rely on the topspin to do the damage. Both highly feared/respected on that surface. Both lefties with RG's top prize in his position. Nadal has two to Muster's one. The only thing Nadal has yet to accomplish is the no. 1 rank.)

Nalbandian = Agassi (This was a tough given everything that Agassi's accomplished, but this comparison is based mainloy on potential. Nalbandian is one of the cleanest striker's of the ball since Agassi. Watching him play makes me wonder why he hasn't had a breakthrough in a major yet, but then Nalbandandian seems to have a bit of complacency in that he rarely feels the need to move his game up a level or is he capable of moving it up? Also, ala early Agassi, you can see the potential in the way he plays but I question his commitment to taking the step and claiming a match instead of waiting for it to unfold. His fitness is suspect as well as he's shown he can last in a five set match, but if he improved his physical assets maybe he wouldn't have to go five to pull out the win.)

Like I said. Just my thoughts. It's subjective. No "fixing" necessary.

 

[DashaandSafin]

Hewitt was more like Chang. Nadal has way more topspin and power.

 

[civic]

I voted for Safin. To me his matches are a lot more entertaining. Hewitt seemed a little robotic except when he threw a tantrum. I can see how he can be compared to Wilander, especially the service motion! I don't see much similarity between Agassi and Nalbandian though. Roddick kind of reminds me of Courier..

 

[noeledmonds]

Nalbandian = Agassi (This was a tough given everything that Agassi's accomplished, but this comparison is based mainloy on potential. Nalbandian is one of the cleanest striker's of the ball since Agassi. Watching him play makes me wonder why he hasn't had a breakthrough in a major yet, but then Nalbandandian seems to have a bit of complacency in that he rarely feels the need to move his game up a level or is he capable of moving it up? Also, ala early Agassi, you can see the potential in the way he plays but I question his commitment to taking the step and claiming a match instead of waiting for it to unfold. His fitness is suspect as well as he's shown he can last in a five set match, but if he improved his physical assets maybe he wouldn't have to go five to pull out the win.)

Like I said. Just my thoughts. It's subjective. No "fixing" necessary.

Personally I dont think the comparison between Nalbanidan and Agassi is remotely fair, especially on potencial or tallent. Agassi always had the potencial to achive more, losing nearly half of his grand slam finals, and dropping away completely midcareer. Nalbandian on the other hand is not worth more than a slam or 2 on tallent and potencial.

 

[noeledmonds]

I voted for Safin. To me his matches are a lot more entertaining. Hewitt seemed a little robotic except when he threw a tantrum. I can see how he can be compared to Wilander, especially the service motion! I don't see much similarity between Agassi and Nalbandian though. Roddick kind of reminds me of Courier..

Ineed Safin's matches are more entertaining as he is the most tallented player. Hewwit is a couterpuncher and mentally strong, safin is a shot maker and mentally all over the place, but it makes good tennis to watch particularly if he is playing well and fluently.

 

[Gemini]

civic..I can see the Roddick=Courier comparison. I agree.

 

[fuzz nation]

Don't know Safin personally, but I'm pretty sure he's not an ignorant racist turd.

Oh, and in that AusOpen final when Hewitt was going "cmon" on Safin's errors, Marat drowned that punk in his own BS by thumping him for the title. Sweet justice! I think I've considered Safin as a hero of the fuzz nation ever since.

 

[SoBad]

Don't know Safin personally, but I'm pretty sure he's not an ignorant racist turd.

Oh, and in that AusOpen final when Hewitt was going "cmon" on Safin's errors, Marat drowned that punk in his own BS by thumping him for the title. Sweet justice! I think I've considered Safin as a hero of the fuzz nation ever since.

Yeah that's one of the reasons why Safin has made so much more money, and therefore has had a better tennis career.

 

[superman1]

Nalbandian is a very clean striker of the ball, but he doesn't have the power of Agassi. He plays the game very differently. He can become tired and lazy and often goes for drop shots at stupid times. The closest guy to Agassi is Rocky Balboa. Smaller than his opponents, but stronger than all of them. Doesn't move as well as them, less fluid and more clunky. His game required a lot of upper body strength, and he went up against some big, big hitters, yet he kept chugging on, and unlike most players, you never saw him get tired. Hewitt may like Rocky, but Rocky is like Agassi.