Theoretical matchup: Courier v. Nadal at FO

Vincent-C

Vincent-C

Legend
Both in their primes, of course. Could Courier give Raffers some trouble? I like to think so, with his edgy bit of attitude
and intensity.

?
 
I loved Jim Courier and his fiesty attitude and game. However, Jim's relative weakness was his baseball swing style backhand, which is one of the big reasons he ran around it so much to rip his inside out forehand. I don't really see how he would have been able to deal with Nadal's huge spinning forehand to the ad side any better than Federer did, especially since running around to hit a forehand would have been so much harder against Nadal. Plus, Federer was a better mover and had a better serve, forehand, and backhand compared to Jim... so if Fed couldn't beat Nadal at the FO, how would Courier?
 
Jack the Hack said:
I loved Jim Courier and his fiesty attitude and game. However, Jim's relative weakness was his baseball swing style backhand, which is one of the big reasons he ran around it so much to rip his inside out forehand. I don't really see how he would have been able to deal with Nadal's huge spinning forehand to the ad side any better than Federer did, especially since running around to hit a forehand would have been so much harder against Nadal. Plus, Federer was a better mover and had a better serve, forehand, and backhand compared to Jim... so if Fed couldn't beat Nadal at the FO, how would Courier?
Click to expand...
Good post, and sadly, you're probably right. Fed was a leagues-better mover, and.. well, I like to remember
the good times, like '06 Fed easily winning the first set 6-1, then apparently winning the first game of the second, except
for an overrule on a baseline call; then.. oh well, we know what happens next. Bummer.
 
Last edited:
Nadal would pepper Courier's backhand, the old lefty top spin forehand to the righties' backhand routine and any short ball from that would leave Nadal hitting a winner, Nadal could do that all day and he has done to great effect.

Courier would be spending a lot of his time running around his backhand to hit forehands but when he hit a forehand it stayed hit, in 2011 Djokovic employed the inside out forehand to Nadal's forehand which greatly helped Djokovic in his quest to beat Nadal in that year. Then Courier's serve which was solid.

Courier was consistently world class in his prime and sadly unheralded, he's overshadowed by his American compatriots Agassi and Sampras.

I would take Nadal in 4 sets with a tiebreaker thrown in.

My hypothetical is how Gustavo Kuerten's backhand would fare vs Nadal at a French Open.

 
Zardoz7/12 said:
Nadal would pepper Courier's backhand, the old lefty top spin forehand to the righties' backhand routine and any short ball from that would leave Nadal hitting a winner, Nadal could do that all day and he has done to great effect.

Courier would be spending a lot of his time running around his backhand to hit forehands but when he hit a forehand it stayed hit, in 2011 Djokovic employed the inside out forehand to Nadal's forehand which greatly helped Djokovic in his quest to beat Nadal in that year. Then Courier's serve which was solid.

Courier was consistently world class in his prime and sadly unheralded, he's overshadowed by his American compatriots Agassi and Sampras.

I would take Nadal in 4 sets with a tiebreaker thrown in.

My hypothetical is how Gustavo Kuerten's backhand would fare vs Nadal at a French Open.

Click to expand...
Good post, and nice that you have Courier getting a set. One can hope!
 
Nadal drops fewer than ~5 games against the Courier who actually exists and played pro tennis in the 90s.

If we create a hypothetical Courier who's 20% better than he ever was, then he'd probably win more than 5 games.
 
Jack the Hack said:
I loved Jim Courier and his fiesty attitude and game. However, Jim's relative weakness was his baseball swing style backhand, which is one of the big reasons he ran around it so much to rip his inside out forehand. I don't really see how he would have been able to deal with Nadal's huge spinning forehand to the ad side any better than Federer did, especially since running around to hit a forehand would have been so much harder against Nadal. Plus, Federer was a better mover and had a better serve, forehand, and backhand compared to Jim... so if Fed couldn't beat Nadal at the FO, how would Courier?
Click to expand...
Courier actually was very much like Sinner style wise but with a better mentality. The courier bh was actually only a weakness against serve volleyers as he couldnt keepmit low enoough often enough. Against baseliners his BH was rock solid. Howeer on clay he would struggle v Nadal big time. On hard courts though would be close at his best.
 
Razer said:
If Nadal plays with Courier's racquet and Courier plays with Nadal's then maybe Courier could win.

@NonP @Kralingen
Click to expand...

Compare 90s Athleticism to today's Athleticism , it looks like day and night. Poly has truly changed the tennis with so much movement and defense required now, players chasing balls that was not imaginable in 90s by keeping the ball alive .
 
Last edited:
I still can't help but chuckle at this idea of Courier's "weak" BH. I mean common sense would tell any half-awake moron that nobody wins 2 FOs in a row and almost beats a historically dominant Bruguera for a trifecta without strong groundies off both sides, but you mugs are so duped by his baseball BH or rather the folk wisdom about it that you still buy this dumb nonsense.

Here's the reality: per TA's charting data Borg, Korda Sr. and Agassi are the only Slam champs/RUs with a higher BH potency rating (read: net winners/induced FEs - UFEs) than Courier. But yeah I'm sure Jim's opponents were just dying to attack that vulnerable BH of his especially on dirt.

That said:

Zardoz7/12 said:
Nadal would pepper Courier's backhand, the old lefty top spin forehand to the righties' backhand routine and any short ball from that would leave Nadal hitting a winner, Nadal could do that all day and he has done to great effect.

Courier would be spending a lot of his time running around his backhand to hit forehands but when he hit a forehand it stayed hit, in 2011 Djokovic employed the inside out forehand to Nadal's forehand which greatly helped Djokovic in his quest to beat Nadal in that year. Then Courier's serve which was solid.

Courier was consistently world class in his prime and sadly unheralded, he's overshadowed by his American compatriots Agassi and Sampras.

I would take Nadal in 4 sets with a tiebreaker thrown in.

My hypothetical is how Gustavo Kuerten's backhand would fare vs Nadal at a French Open.

Click to expand...
This is a good post. I'll just add that clay arguably helps (if that's the way to put it) Courier more than Nadal in that it gives Jim more time to set up his trademark I-O FHs and mitigate his footwork/speed disadvantages.

Also Guga's BH would hold up just fine against Bull (yes, thanks in no small part to his height). The key would be keeping his UFE counts low cuz he went for broke much more than the typical dirtballer. Hence his relatively low GW%s - in fact he gained admission to the exclusive 60% Club only once! - but when he catches fire with that most potent arsenal likely ever seen on terre battue as was his wont in big matches... watch out. More on this dream matchup here:

Who was the greater clay court player - Vilas or Kuerten

there are some other threads on greatness list of clay court players. I thought I would have a focussed one on Vilas vs Kuerten kuerten and Vilas were very close - guga has 3 clay majors and Vilas has 2. But Vilas has 3 runner ups at Roland Garros and 7 Masters 1000 equivalents on clay. Guga...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

One more thing (or two):

Razer said:
If Nadal plays with Courier's racquet and Courier plays with Nadal's then maybe Courier could win.

@NonP @Kralingen
Click to expand...
With similar racquets '92 Jim would actually get the better of weaker versions of Bull ('06/13/22 and perhaps one of the later ones), but the rest would be too strong for him. In the '93 RG F (follow the first hyperlink for deets) you can tell Sergi was simply the more natural dirtballer and you'd see much of the same dynamics between One-Trick Pony and Mailman.

Now that '93 (RG) Bruguera would be a serious threat to all but the absolute best versions of Pig-Pen ('08/17 and maybe '12). We're talking all-out topspin WAR with blood spilled all over the court! (Believe it or not their average FH/BH RPMs are virtually identical, around 3200-3300/2400.)
 
NonP said:
With similar racquets '92 Jim would actually get the better of weaker versions of Bull ('06/13/22 and perhaps one of the later ones), but the rest would be too strong for him. In the '93 RG F (follow the first hyperlink for deets) you can tell Sergi was simply the more natural dirtballer and you'd see much of the same dynamics between One-Trick Pony and Mailman.

Now that '93 (RG) Bruguera would be a serious threat to all but the absolute best versions of Pig-Pen ('08/17 and maybe '12). We're talking all-out topspin WAR with blood spilled all over the court! (Believe it or not their average FH/BH RPMs are virtually identical, around 3200-3300/2400.)
Click to expand...

nadal of RG 06/13 is clearly better than nadal of RG 14 and 18-20.
and nadal of RG 11 is worse than both RG 06 and 13 nadal.

fed/djokovic won't beat any slam winning versions of Nadal at RG (save maybe 22), but Courier would get better of RG 06/13 nadal?
really?
 
Courier beating Nadal on Chatrier....

210630120831-laughter-stock.jpg
 
I don't see him causing him a lot of trouble.

Kuerten is someone who might. I'd also would like to see a peak Ferrero vs Nadal on clay (although he wouldn't win either, it would be interesting to see how much he could trouble him).
 
Couriers game was much more modern than either Sampras or even Agassi. He had heavy topspin strokes on both wings, with power to boot. And his fitness and willingness to hit inside out forehands would make him lethal on clay. That said, we are talking about Nadal here, a GOAT candidate on his best surface, probably the highest level over a long period any player has ever reached on a surface. Nadal would win in 4 sets most of the time.
 
President said:
Couriers game was much more modern than either Sampras or even Agassi. He had heavy topspin strokes on both wings, with power to boot. And his fitness and willingness to hit inside out forehands would make him lethal on clay. That said, we are talking about Nadal here, a GOAT candidate on his best surface, probably the highest level over a long period any player has ever reached on a surface. Nadal would win in 4 sets most of the time.
Click to expand...

No way could Courier get a set. Nadal would pound that ugly backhand over and over.
 
BauerAlmeida said:
I don't see him causing him a lot of trouble.

Kuerten is someone who might. I'd also would like to see a peak Ferrero vs Nadal on clay (although he wouldn't win either, it would be interesting to see how much he could trouble him).
Click to expand...

Would have loved to see those matches too. Guga could have given Nadal some trouble for sure.

Peak Rios vs Nadal would have been fun to see too.
 
daggerman said:
Nadal drops fewer than ~5 games against the Courier who actually exists and played pro tennis in the 90s.

If we create a hypothetical Courier who's 20% better than he ever was, then he'd probably win more than 5 games.
Click to expand...

Maybe modern poly and such would make Peak Jim that 20% better
 
Another thread attempting to minimize Rafa's clay dominance with bs matchup scenarios. No, Courier would not trouble Rafa at RG. If Federer and Djokovic have more than enough trouble beating Rafa at RG, even well past Rafa's prime at that, what makes anyone think Courier could do it? Nonsense.
 
You worthless mugs should try watching that clip of the '93 RG F @Zardoz7/12 shared earlier. If you think those two would be a pushover for anyone on this surface you need to get your eyes checked or find a different hobby.

Back to reality:

abmk said:
nadal of RG 06/13 is clearly better than nadal of RG 14 and 18-20.
and nadal of RG 11 is worse than both RG 06 and 13 nadal.

fed/djokovic won't beat any slam winning versions of Nadal at RG (save maybe 22), but Courier would get better of RG 06/13 nadal?
really?
Click to expand...
As I've pointed out before '06 One-Trick Pony was still a little too defensive for Bullish dominance - just what Mailman would've preferred cuz he liked to play close to the baseline to offset his not-so-elite mobility. And we already know how Courier dealt with GOATing Bruguera with a more aggressive return.

And '13 Bull never reached his top gear vs. Djoker except in the 5th set when he absolutely had to, which could well be his undoing against '92 Jim who had his own historically dominant run (67.5% of GW, in case you've forgotten) against the likes of Muster, Mancini, AMed, Goran, Dre and Korda. Believe it or not Courier would be the one playing with more focus and intensity in this matchup. Like I said next door you underrate prime Jim's moxie at your peril.

'06 and '13 are the two Bulls with the lowest GW%s (both seasonal and tournament) in his physical prime for a reason. To moi (yes, again) it's no coincidence that the closest Fedovic came to upsetting their nemesis on dirt in Bo5 happened in those two years. Not so hard to envision peak Courier doing 'em one set better.

Won't add much on post-'17 Bull (didn't follow his runs all that closely) except that he played significantly better at RG proper than leading up to it. But his physical decline may well be exposed/exploited by an ATG dirtballer, hence my earlier "perhaps one of the later ones" caveat.

BauerAlmeida said:
I don't see him causing him a lot of trouble.

Kuerten is someone who might. I'd also would like to see a peak Ferrero vs Nadal on clay (although he wouldn't win either, it would be interesting to see how much he could trouble him).
Click to expand...
There's zero chance Ferrero does better against Bull than Jim friggin' Courier, LOL. I mean I dig Mosquito's FH myself but he never torched his opponents on dirt like '92/93 Jim, and while he did have a dominant pre-SF run at '01 RG (an impressive 66.0% of GW overall, still short of '92 Mailman's championship run) we all know what happened when he faced red-hot Guga. OTOH nobody beats peak Mailman at RG in straights.

accidental said:
Courier would probably struggle, considering he used an 85 inch pro staff the years he won RG
Click to expand...
Of course this kind of hypo all but assumes that both players would be wielding comparable sticks.

President said:
Couriers game was much more modern than either Sampras or even Agassi. He had heavy topspin strokes on both wings, with power to boot. And his fitness and willingness to hit inside out forehands would make him lethal on clay. That said, we are talking about Nadal here, a GOAT candidate on his best surface, probably the highest level over a long period any player has ever reached on a surface. Nadal would win in 4 sets most of the time.
Click to expand...
Hard to say Jim's game is that much more "modern" than Dre's when so many youngsters have tried to copy the latter's half-baselining and his career in fact lasted longer. And even now there are plenty of top guys with flattish strokes, Djoker included. Topspin ain't everything.

No beef with the rest.
 
NeutralFan said:
Compare 90s Athleticism to today's Athleticism , it looks like day and night. Poly has truly changed the tennis with so much movement and defense required now, players chasing balls that was not imaginable in 90s by keeping the ball alive .
Click to expand...
I don't get the repetitive comparisons of players so far apart.
 
NonP said:
As I've pointed out before '06 One-Trick Pony was still a little too defensive for Bullish dominance - just what Mailman would've preferred cuz he liked to play close to the baseline to offset his not-so-elite mobility. And we already know how Courier dealt with GOATing Bruguera with a more aggressive return.

And '13 Bull never reached his top gear vs. Djoker except in the 5th set when he absolutely had to, which could well be his undoing against '92 Jim who had his own historically dominant run (67.5% of GW, in case you've forgotten) against the likes of Muster, Mancini, AMed, Goran, Dre and Korda. Believe it or not Courier would be the one playing with more focus and intensity in this matchup. Like I said next door you underrate prime Jim's moxie at your peril.

'06 and '13 are the two Bulls with the lowest GW%s (both seasonal and tournament) in his physical prime for a reason. To moi (yes, again) it's no coincidence that the closest Fedovic came to upsetting their nemesis on dirt in Bo5 happened in those two years. Not so hard to envision peak Courier doing 'em one set better.
Click to expand...
Anyone who's actually watched and analyzed properly knows 06 RG Nadal was clearly better than 11 Nadal and 14 Nadal at RG.
ditto for RG 13 nadal being clearly better than 11&14 nadal at RG.
06 nadal was in the midst of his 81 clay match streak and even Fed playing at Rome 06 final couldn't finish him off. all that little more defensive for liking goes into the bin when it is that difficult to finish him off and he's making impossible gets along with the heaviest fh ever on clay.

11 RG nadal was taken to 5 by Isner. and ~30 yo old fed (granted with faster balls) would've likely taken him to 5 if not for choking the 1st set away. (had SP and just missed the dropshot)
14 nadal was very below par on clay by his standards in Bo3. just raised his level in time for RG, but still had declined had compared to previous years.
13 djoko would've easily taken 14 nadal to 5 sets and more likely won than the chance he had in 13.

and no to the bold part. 14 djokovic was just much worse than 13 RG in the nadal match.
and I already addressed the 11 part.
NonP said:
Won't add much on post-'17 Bull (didn't follow his runs all that closely) except that he played significantly better at RG proper than leading up to it. But his physical decline may well be exposed/exploited by an ATG dirtballer, hence my earlier "perhaps one of the later ones" caveat.
Click to expand...
if that's so, why are you so insistent prime fedovic wouldn't have a good shot at Nadal of RG 18-20.
Courier isn't a level above them, you know.
 
Last edited:
Olli Jokinen said:
If broken down Guga can beat Federer at FO 2004, prime Guga has a chance against Rafa. That guy was good.
Click to expand...
Playing Fed on clay in 2004 is different to playing Nadal I know this a hot take but I think Fed would have won most time against them too if he didn't have a off day. Some people do think they would beat Fed fairly easily though.

In theory everybody does have some sort of chance to win though in any match.
 
NonP said:
You worthless mugs should try watching that clip of the '93 RG F @Zardoz7/12 shared earlier. If you think those two would be a pushover for anyone on this surface you need to get your eyes checked or find a different hobby.

Back to reality:


As I've pointed out before '06 One-Trick Pony was still a little too defensive for Bullish dominance - just what Mailman would've preferred cuz he liked to play close to the baseline to offset his not-so-elite mobility. And we already know how Courier dealt with GOATing Bruguera with a more aggressive return.

And '13 Bull never reached his top gear vs. Djoker except in the 5th set when he absolutely had to, which could well be his undoing against '92 Jim who had his own historically dominant run (67.5% of GW, in case you've forgotten) against the likes of Muster, Mancini, AMed, Goran, Dre and Korda. Believe it or not Courier would be the one playing with more focus and intensity in this matchup. Like I said next door you underrate prime Jim's moxie at your peril.

'06 and '13 are the two Bulls with the lowest GW%s (both seasonal and tournament) in his physical prime for a reason. To moi (yes, again) it's no coincidence that the closest Fedovic came to upsetting their nemesis on dirt in Bo5 happened in those two years. Not so hard to envision peak Courier doing 'em one set better.

Won't add much on post-'17 Bull (didn't follow his runs all that closely) except that he played significantly better at RG proper than leading up to it. But his physical decline may well be exposed/exploited by an ATG dirtballer, hence my earlier "perhaps one of the later ones" caveat.


There's zero chance Ferrero does better against Bull than Jim friggin' Courier, LOL. I mean I dig Mosquito's FH myself but he never torched his opponents on dirt like '92/93 Jim, and while he did have a dominant pre-SF run at '01 RG (an impressive 66.0% of GW overall, still short of '92 Mailman's championship run) we all know what happened when he faced red-hot Guga. OTOH nobody beats peak Mailman at RG in straights.


Of course this kind of hypo all but assumes that both players would be wielding comparable sticks.


Hard to say Jim's game is that much more "modern" than Dre's when so many youngsters have tried to copy the latter's half-baselining and his career in fact lasted longer. And even now there are plenty of top guys with flattish strokes, Djoker included. Topspin ain't everything.

No beef with the rest.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this thoughtful comment.
 
RS said:
Playing Fed on clay in 2004 is different to playing Nadal I know this a hot take but I think Fed would have won most time against them too if he didn't have a off day. Some people do think they would beat Fed fairly easily though.

In theory everybody does have some sort of chance to win though in any match.
Click to expand...
Injury-free Guga wins every match against anyone! No, but I think he's the only one who could stand up to Rafa on clay. People tend to forget how scary good that guy was.
 
RS said:
I don't get the repetitive comparisons of players so far apart.
Click to expand...
You include Pistol and Agassi in your hypos all the time but Jim (who's actually younger than Dre by 4 months) is somehow off limits? You really haven't thought this through.

abmk said:
Anyone who's actually watched properly knows 06 RG Nadal was clearly better than 11 Nadal and 14 Nadal at RG.
ditto for RG 13 nadal being clearly better than 11&14 nadal at RG.
06 nadal was in the midst of his 81 clay match streak and even Fed playing at Rome 06 final couldn't finish him off.

11 RG nadal was taken to 5 by Isner. and ~30 yo old fed would've likely taken him to 5 if not for choking the 1st set away. (had SP and just missed the dropshot)
14 nadal was very below par on clay by his standards in Bo3. just raised his level in time for RG, but still had declined had compared to previous years.
13 djoko would've easily taken 14 nadal to 5 sets and more likely won than the chance he had in 13.
Click to expand...
How can you make such a big deal out of that 5-setter vs. Isner in '11 when Bull actually lost more sets/games in his '06 and '13 runs? It's hardly unusual for anyone to struggle in the 1st warm-up round against a big server/hitter, yes even on this surface. Happens to the best of 'em.

Also "just raised his level in time for RG" is a pretty big caveat, don't ya think? We're talking how these guys would fare against Bull at THE event, presumably in the SF/F. What happened before would be more relevant if Bull barely stayed above the 60% seasonal threshold a la '22, but '11/14 Nadal wasn't remotely there yet.

And I've said this before but that 81-match winning streak doesn't mean much in this context. Playing it (relatively) safe and maintaining a consistent 9.3-9.6 level may get you the most Ws against the field, but when your back is against the wall vs. a peaking ATG like Courier, Bruguera or Kuerten? You need that 9.7-9.9 for those showdowns even if that means eating up a few extra Ls due to a more aggressive (read: fluctuating) game. That's why '06 Bull was mediocre (again by his crazy standards) in GW% even though his W-L% says otherwise.

Olli Jokinen said:
If broken down Guga can beat Federer at FO 2004, prime Guga has a chance against Rafa. That guy was good.
Click to expand...
That '01 SF vs. Ferrero was an even more impressive outing from Guga. Probably the highest non-Nadalian peak on dirt of this century.

Humphrey20133 said:
With that one-handed backhand? On Chatrier? No way in hell, sorry.
Click to expand...
Mariano friggin' Puerta arguably gave your boy the toughest challenge in all his FO Fs and even midget Gaudio's 1-hander more than held up against him, but hey, don't let the facts get in your way.

NeutralFan said:
90s was special not because 90s player will own the post2004 players but 90s competition was high with courts not being homoznized.
Click to expand...
Disagreements aside I'm down with the latter sentiment.
 
NonP said:
How can you make such a big deal out of that 5-setter vs. Isner in '11 when Bull actually lost more sets/games in his '06 and '13 runs? It's hardly unusual for anyone to struggle in the 1st warm-up round against a big server/hitter, yes even on this surface. Happens to the best of 'em.
Click to expand...
never happened to nadal any other time in 1R to 3R at RG from 06-14 that he lost 2 sets, let alone being down 2 sets to one.
nadal was also close to be being breadsticked by Andujar in 3R of RG 11. Andujar just happened to choke massively.
NonP said:
Also "just raised his level in time for RG" is a pretty big caveat, don't ya think? We're talking how these guys would fare against Bull at THE event, presumably in the SF/F. What happened before would be more relevant if Bull barely stayed above the 60% seasonal threshold a la '22, but '11/14 Nadal wasn't remotely there yet.
Click to expand...
except he still didn't come to his level in previous years at RG, which I added. point of Bo3 was to show how much he had declined.
NonP said:
And I've said this before but that 81-match winning streak doesn't mean much in this context. Playing it (relatively) safe and maintaining a consistent 9.3-9.6 level may get you the most Ws against the field, but when your back is against the wall vs. a peaking ATG like Courier, Bruguera or Kuerten? You need that 9.7-9.9 for those showdowns even if that means eating up a few extra Ls due to a more aggressive (read: fluctuating) game. That's why '06 Bull was mediocre (again by his crazy standards) in GW% even though his W-L% says otherwise.
Click to expand...
actually, no, that's not necessary true on clay.
Also as a counter-point, 06 Nadal survived fricking Fed at Rome 06 level. (even Monte Carlo 06 level from fed was better than his RG 06 level and nadal beat him in 4th set TB there as well)
The streak does mean quite a bit here. it was that tough to finish him off in Bo3, let alone Bo5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mainad
Courier v Edberg in Slam finals
Replies
10
Views
2K
Bobby Jr
Bobby Jr
R
Courier vs Murray- who is the better tennis player
Replies
32
Views
3K
Russeljones
Russeljones
O
Seems Jim Courier is on the "Nadal may be GOAT" train as well
2 3 4
Replies
191
Views
23K
Ecoplex
E
V
Oldererrr v. Oldovic
Replies
1
Views
600
ollinger
ollinger
yellowoctopus
Courier to counter Nadal's routines at Cup
2
Replies
52
Views
6K
dh003i
D
Back
Top