Tsitsipas comments on playing Medvedev - “It’s just boring”

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Who's blaming the 3 GOATs but one can't deny that that the field is top heavy with some Goats are still in their prime especially Djokovic. I mean they are called Goat for a reason.

You are pissed off because the young generation is not doing their 'job' and preventing them from winning anymore so to reserve Fed's goat status.
Nah, I've moved on and don't care about Fed's GOAT status.

Djokovic is not in his prime. Outside of the AO, he has been quite average this year overall. He managed to win a second slam due to nobody stepping up to stop him. Similar to Fed in 2014, who didn't get so lucky.

Other than Medvedev, the ineptitude of the other young players can't be pinned on the 3 GOATS.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yeah, while you've presented seriously lethal argument putting all the burden on the young generation. And Fed played Sampras once and barely beat him and didn't win the Wimbledon that year. Not a nobel prize worthy accomplishment there.
Argument 1: Fed defeated Sampras. Tsitsipas got destroyed by an older Nadal.

Argument 2: Sampras lost consecutive USO finals to Safin and Hewitt. And at the time, he was a GOAT too. Proof that strong young players can beat a GOAT.

Argument 3: Tsitsipas's ineptitude this year has little to do with the 3 GOATS as he is 3-3 in slams after AO.

Good enough for you?
 

Zara

Legend
Federer is even older than them.

You clearly have an anti-Fed agenda. And have literally 0 arguments.

All you have is 3 GOATS bla bla bla.
It seems Federer is sacred or something as clearly one can't say anything about him without having an agenda behind it. I mentioned 3 goats and Federer is only one of them. And yet, you can't help yourself.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It seems Federer is sacred or something as clearly one can't say anything about him without having an agenda behind it. I mentioned 3 goats and Federer is only one of them. And yet, you can't help yourself.
No, you mentioned 3 GOATS in relation to Tsitsipas and I disagreed because they can't be blamed for his ineptitude.

This is the trap many people fall into: if a young gun underperforms, it's the 3 GOATS. When pointing out how well Fed did at their age, the counter is he didn't have 3 GOATS to deal with. Thus implying that these young players are some Federer-like talents who are just unlucky to be dealing with 3 GOATS.

It has become beyond ridiculous at this point.
 

Zara

Legend
Argument 1: Fed defeated Sampras. Tsitsipas got destroyed by an older Nadal.

Argument 2: Sampras lost consecutive USO finals to Safin and Hewitt. And at the time, he was a GOAT too. Proof that strong young players can beat a GOAT.

Argument 3: Tsitsipas's ineptitude this year has little to do with the 3 GOATS as he is 3-3 in slams after AO.

Good enough for you?
Your arguments are laughable at best especially the Federer one. He beat Sampras at Wimbledon, true but he didn’t win it which is truly the target. Also, Sampras was in a very poor form that year (which actually started in 2000) and would only pick up his level at Slams and even there he got beat by other players. Safin and Hewitt are far better examples however Sampras was still not at the same level as Djokovic and Nadal are now. I want to see if a Safin, Hewitt are capable at beating Sampras while Pete is playing at the current Nadal or Djokovic level. And where are those 2 slam wonders anyway.

Federer barely beat anyone goat worthy to win any of his major title from 2003 to 2007 and instead got beat on his favourite surface no less the following year by the clay goat.
 
Last edited:

Zara

Legend
No, you mentioned 3 GOATS in relation to Tsitsipas and I disagreed because they can't be blamed for his ineptitude.

This is the trap many people fall into: if a young gun underperforms, it's the 3 GOATS. When pointing out how well Fed did at their age, the counter is he didn't have 3 GOATS to deal with. Thus implying that these young players are some Federer-like talents who are just unlucky to be dealing with 3 GOATS.

It has become beyond ridiculous at this point.
It’s not just the 3 goats but 3 players with very strong resume not to mention, far more experienced and still playing at least at 70% level. You are just an armchair critic who never played at professional level but cozy enough to pass on judgements. Now that’s quite ridiculous.
 

Zara

Legend
Nah, I've moved on and don't care about Fed's GOAT status.

Djokovic is not in his prime. Outside of the AO, he has been quite average this year overall. He managed to win a second slam due to nobody stepping up to stop him. Similar to Fed in 2014, who didn't get so lucky.

Other than Medvedev, the ineptitude of the other young players can't be pinned on the 3 GOATS.
Of course you don’t care about Fed’s Goat status NOW.

And Djokovic has only won the last few slams so yes, I agree he’s not in his prime. Lol. It’s quite normal to operate at a lower level after such a high performance but it’s still good enough.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It’s not just the 3 goats but 3 players with very strong resume not to mention, far more experienced and still playing at least at 70% level. You are just an armchair critic who never played at professional level but cozy enough to pass on judgements. Now that’s quite ridiculous.
All of us are armchair critics, including you.

I just see things differently and prefer to not just excuse the ineptitude of the young guns just because 3 GOATS.

Safin and Hewitt proved that GOATS can be beaten. So did Fed.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Your arguments are laughable at best especially the Federer one. He beat Sampras at Wimbledon, true but he didn’t win it which is truly the target. Also, Sampras was in a very poor form that year (which actually started in 2000) and would only pick up his level at Slams and even there he got beat by other players. Safin and Hewitt are far better examples however Sampras was still not at the same level as Djokovic and Nadal are now. I want to see if a Safin, Hewitt are capable at beating Sampras while Pete is playing at the current Nadal or Djokovic level. And where are those 2 slam wonders anyway.

Federer barely beat anyone goat worthy to win any of his major title from 2003 to 2007 and instead got beat on his favourite surface no less the following year by the clay goat.
No, my arguments are laughable because I don't support your assertion.

Sampras playing at a lower level is just an excuse. He was playing well in those USO's in which he lost to Safin and Hewitt. Maybe Nadal and Djokovic are winning because there is nobody today even on the level of Safin and Hewitt of those times. It doesn't change the fact that they are indeed older than Sampras was when he was losing to Safin and Hewitt.

Nadal defeated no one worth mentioning in 2010, 2017, 2018 and 2019. As for Federer, he was beating Agassi, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nadal and Djokovic in 2003-2007. All of them much better than anyone worth mentioning today.

Oh, it seems you are one of those guys who go with the 2003-2007 propaganda because it is so trendy. Why am I even bothering?
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
All of us are armchair critics, including you.

I just see things differently and prefer to not just excuse the ineptitude of the young guns just because 3 GOATS.

Safin and Hewitt proved that GOATS can be beaten. So did Fed.
Tsitsipas also showed Goats can be beaten, less than a year ago he beat the AO champion goat.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Of course you don’t care about Fed’s Goat status NOW.

And Djokovic has only won the last few slams so yes, I agree he’s not in his prime. Lol. It’s quite normal to operate at a lower level after such a high performance but it’s still good enough.
It's still good enough because there is nobody to challenge Novak.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Tsitsipas also showed Goats can be beaten, less than a year ago he beat the AO champion goat.
And got destroyed by Nadal afterwards.

I prefer to judge Tsitsipas based on how he does vs the younger Djokodal, not the 38 year old guy whom he should be beating anyway.

Sampras and Agassi weren't 37-38 when Hewitt, Safin and Fed were beating them.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
News just in, news just in

Reacting to Tsitsipas’ Daniil Medvedev said in an interview on Tuesday: “Every player can tell some digs about another. But I’m not taking Tsitsipas seriously anymore. Especially after his words about the Laver Cup celebration. He said ‘they forced him to drink alcohol. It’s OK. But he also said: Mom, it was disgustingly. I can show the video’.”

Daniil Medvedev also revealed that he and Tsitsipas are not friends. “He said my game is boring? For real? Well, I’m not going to argue with him. Everybody has their own style. If someone thinks it’s boring – it’s okay, not a big deal. We are definitely not friends, nor are we enemies. We are colleagues, that’s it,” Medvedev added.

Daniil Medvedev has withdrawn from his home tournament, the Moscow River Cup 2019 as he is tired after playing some intense tennis in the past 11 weeks, reaching six straight finals including the US Open 2019 and claiming two Masters 1000 title. He is now scheduled to compete at the Rolex Paris Masters 2019, later this month. (y)

 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
And got destroyed by Nadal afterwards.

I prefer to judge Tsitsipas based on how he does vs the younger Djokodal, not the 38 year old guy whom he should be beating anyway.

Sampras and Agassi weren't 37-38 when Hewitt, Safin and Fed were beating them.
Excuses excuses
Federer was the AO champion no matter what age. Rafa couldn’t beat him previous year.
It was an impressive win for young Tsitsipas on the big stage.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
News just in, news just in

Reacting to Tsitsipas’ Daniil Medvedev said in an interview on Tuesday: “Every player can tell some digs about another. But I’m not taking Tsitsipas seriously anymore. Especially after his words about the Laver Cup celebration. He said ‘they forced him to drink alcohol. It’s OK. But he also said: Mom, it was disgustingly. I can show the video’.”

Daniil Medvedev also revealed that he and Tsitsipas are not friends. “He said my game is boring? For real? Well, I’m not going to argue with him. Everybody has their own style. If someone thinks it’s boring – it’s okay, not a big deal. We are definitely not friends, nor are we enemies. We are colleagues, that’s it,” Medvedev added.

Daniil Medvedev has withdrawn from his home tournament, the Moscow River Cup 2019 as he is tired after playing some intense tennis in the past 11 weeks, reaching six straight finals including the US Open 2019 and claiming two Masters 1000 title. He is now scheduled to compete at the Rolex Paris Masters 2019, later this month. (y)

Would be nice if this became like a big tennis rivalry. Tsitsipas will do everything to beat Medvedev. 3 years younger.. he got time. Think about the celebration hehe
At some point some players will get on Medvedevs nerves and head. This is so fun In tennis, watch how things turn out. Nothing ever stays the same, always movement.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Excuses excuses
Federer was the AO champion no matter what age. Rafa couldn’t beat him previous year.
It was an impressive win for young Tsitsipas on the big stage.
Pretty much this thread in a nutshell anyway.

See, that's my point. We have stooped so low as to consider a 20 year old beating a 37 year old groundbreaking and unbelievable, when it's something that should be within the bounds of the ordinary.

Rafa didn't even play Fed the previous year anyway. And did you consider that Fed may have been better last year than this year?
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Pretty much this thread in a nutshell anyway.

See, that's my point. We have stooped so low as to consider a 20 year old beating a 37 year old groundbreaking and unbelievable, when it's something that should be within the bounds of the ordinary.

Rafa didn't even play Fed the previous year anyway. And did you consider that Fed may have been better last year than this year?
I meant the previous year of 2018 since I talked about that year in the sentence before...
 
Pretty much this thread in a nutshell anyway.

See, that's my point. We have stooped so low as to consider a 20 year old beating a 37 year old groundbreaking and unbelievable, when it's something that should be within the bounds of the ordinary.

Rafa didn't even play Fed the previous year anyway. And did you consider that Fed may have been better last year than this year?
It's no secret that most young players are very weak. However, the big 3 are also not that bad, even if they are long past their primes. Sometimes they are still very hard to beat.
 

Raphael Nadal

Professional
The first 2 sets of the US Open Final were relatively boring, because Medvedev was playing his traditional style of tennis, lots of slow stuff.
Moya mentioned this when interviewed during the match, he said Rafa was playing too 'tactical', and this was happening because Medvedev was playing 'tactical' (change of pace, varied angles) and Rafa was accepting that challenge and outdoing Medvedev at his own game :)
It was more entertaining later in the match when both guys hit harder and came to the net frequently.
 
Novak was also called a whiner back in the days.
Look at him now.
It’s more like people in this threads are whiners. Tsitsipas playing his ass of on tour and done great. It’s less than a year since he won his first ATP title, 250 in Stockholm, I was there! Tsitsipas is awesome! I have a video of his speech, very touching and nice attitude. I could maybe post it to stop your whining?
Djoker is still a whiner. French Open? Rafa, Thiem, and Fed never complained.

This has nothing to do with his play. Simple, he took a shot at the best player on tour right now after a loss... call it what you want, whining, sore loser, or simply frustrated.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Djoker is still a whiner. French Open? Rafa, Thiem, and Fed never complained.

This has nothing to do with his play. Simple, he took a shot at the best player on tour right now after a loss... call it what you want, whining, sore loser, or simply frustrated.
Whats wrong with that? He is only a human being just like you and me. You whine about things too.
 
Whats wrong with that? He is only a human being just like you and me. You whine about things too.
Yes I do. Did I say it was a bad thing? Just stated what it was. Variety is good. All types of personalities is good for the game.

They all whine, they are millionaires playing a sport that they badly want to win.

But people are going to see it as sour grapes when you make comments like that after losing whether it is Fed, Rafa, Djoker or in this case, Tsits. I don't like it when Fed whines either.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes I do. Did I say it was a bad thing? Just stated what it was. Variety is good. All types of personalities is good for the game.

They all whine, they are millionaires playing a sport that they badly want to win.

But people are going to see it as sour grapes when you make comments like that after losing whether it is Fed, Rafa, Djoker or in this case, Tsits. I don't like it when Fed whines either.
It means a lot to Tsitsipas. He really hates losing! Going to make him win slams. He got the right mentality.
 

tonylg

Professional
Of course Medvedev is boring. He's like a 2 metre tall version of Michael Chang, just with a massive serve and even more massive wing span.

In the poly era, boring is where it's at so Tsitsipas is just going to keep losing to him.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
From the little data you have about him, a person you haven’t met or seen talk that much, I find it incredible you can jump to conclusions so quick. I thought better of you! Disappointed! I know more about you than Tsitsipas. Just to put things into perspective here.
Yes, I don't know much about him, so my opinion may change, and it's not important any way, but by saying he got bored playing someone who beat him he certainly did not impress me, for what it's worth. I take it you are a potential future fan?
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, I don't know much about him, so my opinion may change, and it's not important any way, but by saying he got bored playing someone who beat him he certainly did not impress me, for what it's worth. I take it you are a potential future fan?
What impresses you? Fakeness? Arent you tired of PC Fedal? You can see sometimes their real self (that they are humans) coming through... I like it. Every human on this planet got those features, its just that we pretend we dont have them and think we are better than anyone else. What tsitsipas said was not bad, he didnt insult. He was hurt from losing and he doesnt like to play Medvedev. Medvedev hasnt been popular guy until recently, his act during the years been quite provocative. It was during USO he learned he should keep it together to be more popular, cause he wants popularity.
Tsitsipas is like Novak back in the days. Novak doesnt care that much about becoming popular, going his own ways, I like that too.
 

AlexR

Rookie
Tsitsipas is weird. He outright said he “may never beat” Felix A-A... everyone was like “what a wimp”... and then Tsitsipas beat him the next time out. He’s more of a savant than a killer. The true greats I guess are killer savants.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
What impresses you? Fakeness? Arent you tired of PC Fedal?
I don't see it the way you do. The Big 3 by in large have represented themselves and tennis quite well. I don't want to see controversy. I'm quite happy with the people who don't say much but just talk with their rackets, and among those I would pick Laver and Rosewall, Edberg, Sampras and others who did not win as much.
Every human on this planet got those features, its just that we pretend we dont have them and think we are better than anyone else.
You may be projecting your own personality. In my field I'm very good, and people who know me say that. But under no circumstances do I feel that I am superior to other people who are top notch.
What tsitsipas said was not bad, he didnt insult. He was hurt from losing and he doesnt like to play Medvedev.
He's young. I've said many times that I was a worse sport as a young person than any of the top guys. In another few years he'll be a different person, especially after the age of 30. That doesn't change the fact that some of the things he says now are rather immature. At his age I was saying a lot of cringe-worthy things and in fact if I had to go back in time and deal with my 20-something self, I'd probably be totally disgusted. I had a lot of friends who were a lot more mature.

I had a lot of growing up to do. I think he does too. Just my opinion...
Tsitsipas is like Novak back in the days. Novak doesnt care that much about becoming popular, going his own ways, I like that too.
I like Novak much better today, but I liked the player he was early on better because he was more dynamic and exciting to watch. As for being fine with not being popular, I don't see that with Novak at all. I just see a guy who has to live with not being hugely loved, whether it is justified or not.
 
No, my arguments are laughable because I don't support your assertion.

Sampras playing at a lower level is just an excuse. He was playing well in those USO's in which he lost to Safin and Hewitt. Maybe Nadal and Djokovic are winning because there is nobody today even on the level of Safin and Hewitt of those times. It doesn't change the fact that they are indeed older than Sampras was when he was losing to Safin and Hewitt.

Nadal defeated no one worth mentioning in 2010, 2017, 2018 and 2019. As for Federer, he was beating Agassi, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nadal and Djokovic in 2003-2007. All of them much better than anyone worth mentioning today.

Oh, it seems you are one of those guys who go with the 2003-2007 propaganda because it is so trendy. Why am I even bothering?
It is very well known though that Super Saturday affected Sampras' level in those two USO finals. I believe in both tournaments, he happened to beat Hewitt and Safin when he met them before the finals. I mean, all this is said by Sampras fans often times when it suits them, so that's how I know. Anyhow, even in the weak 2002 field, Hewitt only won one other slam and Safin remained mercurial to the end. There IS considerable mythologisation of their achievements. They were both really good players with heart but beating an aging Sampras and intermittent Agassi does not compare to facing THREE Tier 1 greats still playing well enough to win slams. Don't kid yourself, the Big Three are still playing really well and their appetite to fix kinks in their game is enormous. Whether or not the younger generation is inept, the challenge they face is tougher than overcoming Sampras. This isn't even slightly controversial.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
A little salty, eh Stefanos? :)

On Saturday, Stefanos Tsitsipas encountered his fifth straight defeat at the hands of Daniil Medvedev at Rolex Shanghai Masters 2019. After his back-to-back defeat against the Russian machine, Tsitsipas termed the matches against Medvedev as “boring” and was annoyed after his loss.

“Well, I don’t mean to be rude at all, actually, at all, but it’s just boring. It’s boring. It’s so boring that — I don’t know,” he said. “I hate myself, first of all, for putting myself into that kind of situation where I have to play in his own terms and not on my terms. And that’s kind of, I don’t know, reminding me of my childhood years when I was 12 years old playing inside the court,” the Greek lad continued.

Despite is shabby head-2-head record against the 23-year-old Russian, Stefanos Tsitsipas is confident about overcoming the machine, Medvedev. He believes that the chances of defeating Medvedev are more when his get opponent gets hold of the opening set.

“It was very close, and then — I don’t know. Just second serve was a bit, you know — I think once I get the first set from him, chances of beating him are getting higher because he will just keep doing the same thing. He won’t change really much. For me, in order to beat him, I just need to get the first set. That’s it,” Stefanos Tsitsipas explained.

On Saturday, World Number seven, Tsitsipas flawed a forehand at 5-all in the season set, he regretted his mistake at that instant and later reflected upon the places where he needs to work upon. “I should concentrate less on the technical side and leave that on the side during the match and be aware more of what’s in front of me and not think technically too much,” Tsitsipas added.

The Greek typhoon of tennis, Stefanos Tsitsipas dethroned the defending champion and the top-seed, Novak Djokovic in the quarterfinals of Rolex Shanghai Masters 2019. Now, he holds a positive head-2-head record against the Serbian legend.

“I don’t know if I’m going to be able to beat him the next time or the time after that one, but I know there’s going to be a time where I’m going to find opportunities and beat him,” Tsitsipas said. “Probably two, three, four, five, six years’ time, I don’t know, but it’s going to come at some point. The chance of opportunity will be somewhere there. As you saw today, it was very close in a tiebreak,” he added.

Source: https://www.essentiallysports.com/its-just-boring-stefanos-tsitsipas-comments-on-playing-daniil-medvedev/
LOL, ""Just get the 1st set from him and I should be ok" ??? what kind of strategy is that
:-D
 

fundrazer

Legend
I hope that his 1HBH won't prove to be a liability in the modern game.
Honestly, I don't think it will be. He defends very well off that side from what I've seen. I've been impressed by that anyway.... Would probably need to look at his game through a magnifying glass to get a better idea (I don't watch his matches that closely normally), but from what I've seen he does surprisingly well with his backhand vs opponent forehand.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It is very well known though that Super Saturday affected Sampras' level in those two USO finals. I believe in both tournaments, he happened to beat Hewitt and Safin when he met them before the finals. I mean, all this is said by Sampras fans often times when it suits them, so that's how I know. Anyhow, even in the weak 2002 field, Hewitt only won one other slam and Safin remained mercurial to the end. There IS considerable mythologisation of their achievements. They were both really good players with heart but beating an aging Sampras and intermittent Agassi does not compare to facing THREE Tier 1 greats still playing well enough to win slams. Don't kid yourself, the Big Three are still playing really well and their appetite to fix kinks in their game is enormous. Whether or not the younger generation is inept, the challenge they face is tougher than overcoming Sampras. This isn't even slightly controversial.
What I do find slightly controversial is assuming that these young players are some Fed level talents who are not winning because of the Big 3, which in itself is erroneous anyway. Fed was always better than the Next Gen and it's wrong to assume that he would have been as inept as the young ones today.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It is very well known though that Super Saturday affected Sampras' level in those two USO finals. I believe in both tournaments, he happened to beat Hewitt and Safin when he met them before the finals. I mean, all this is said by Sampras fans often times when it suits them, so that's how I know. Anyhow, even in the weak 2002 field, Hewitt only won one other slam and Safin remained mercurial to the end. There IS considerable mythologisation of their achievements. They were both really good players with heart but beating an aging Sampras and intermittent Agassi does not compare to facing THREE Tier 1 greats still playing well enough to win slams. Don't kid yourself, the Big Three are still playing really well and their appetite to fix kinks in their game is enormous. Whether or not the younger generation is inept, the challenge they face is tougher than overcoming Sampras. This isn't even slightly controversial.
And besides, didn't he beat Hewitt and Safin in straights in those semis? I could understand Super Saturday affecting him if those matches were long epic matches, but it wasn't the case. So I don't really buy the Super Saturday argument.
 
And besides, didn't he beat Hewitt and Safin in straights in those semis? I could understand Super Saturday affecting him if those matches were long epic matches, but it wasn't the case. So I don't really buy the Super Saturday argument.
Yes, it was straight sets but he was always frail after getting thallasemia minor. That's why he chip charged to death in the late 90s.
 
What I do find slightly controversial is assuming that these young players are some Fed level talents who are not winning because of the Big 3, which in itself is erroneous anyway. Fed was always better than the Next Gen and it's wrong to assume that he would have been as inept as the young ones today.
I don't see anyone saying they are Fed level talents. Only that Fed wasn't exactly a shining beacon yet at the age they are now and that it's too early to write them off. Both entirely reasonable propositions.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't see it the way you do. The Big 3 by in large have represented themselves and tennis quite well. I don't want to see controversy. I'm quite happy with the people who don't say much but just talk with their rackets, and among those I would pick Laver and Rosewall, Edberg, Sampras and others who did not win as much.

You may be projecting your own personality. In my field I'm very good, and people who know me say that. But under no circumstances do I feel that I am superior to other people who are top notch.

He's young. I've said many times that I was a worse sport as a young person than any of the top guys. In another few years he'll be a different person, especially after the age of 30. That doesn't change the fact that some of the things he says now are rather immature. At his age I was saying a lot of cringe-worthy things and in fact if I had to go back in time and deal with my 20-something self, I'd probably be totally disgusted. I had a lot of friends who were a lot more mature.

I had a lot of growing up to do. I think he does too. Just my opinion...

I like Novak much better today, but I liked the player he was early on better because he was more dynamic and exciting to watch. As for being fine with not being popular, I don't see that with Novak at all. I just see a guy who has to live with not being hugely loved, whether it is justified or not.
Do you remember how Federer was? So far Tsitsipas has had better behaviour than Federer had. Yes its being immature, but it is a killer instinct and they hate to lose so much. The way they sometimes snap is probably just a small part of what they actually feel, its so much more, cause they do try to keep it together as we all do. To say the brutal truth: They probably cry at home sometimes after losses. Thats the difference between we sitting here online and they being out there on court working hard. They hate losing intensely. Just that itself, is pretty immature. Why they have to win? Why do they have to do all this big stuff in their life to prove to themselves they are worthy? Its giving us entertainment, thats for sure. Its giving us many things in life, from people w this drive. But its a nightmare being w them in the private sphere, as they are egoistic and immature, they arent spiritually developed or having peace w themselves.

Novak is probably the one of the big 3 that is most loved. As his fans love him unconditionally. The Serb thing. Federer fans leave and talk **** about him when he is not doing well. Just look in this forum, most of them are gone now. Try to put things into persepctive, you cannot say a player isnt loved when he has million of fans. Quality is better than quantity.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I don't see anyone saying they are Fed level talents. Only that Fed wasn't exactly a shining beacon yet at the age they are now and that it's too early to write them off. Both entirely reasonable propositions.
That's ok and all, but when I did say that Fed won Wimb at 21 years and 11 months, the first reply was "3 GOATS". That pretty much implies what I said.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It is very well known though that Super Saturday affected Sampras' level in those two USO finals. I believe in both tournaments, he happened to beat Hewitt and Safin when he met them before the finals. I mean, all this is said by Sampras fans often times when it suits them, so that's how I know. Anyhow, even in the weak 2002 field, Hewitt only won one other slam and Safin remained mercurial to the end. There IS considerable mythologisation of their achievements. They were both really good players with heart but beating an aging Sampras and intermittent Agassi does not compare to facing THREE Tier 1 greats still playing well enough to win slams. Don't kid yourself, the Big Three are still playing really well and their appetite to fix kinks in their game is enormous. Whether or not the younger generation is inept, the challenge they face is tougher than overcoming Sampras. This isn't even slightly controversial.
It's time to stop sugarcoating their performances.

Tsitsipas was destroyed by a Nadal who didn't even play that great at the AO this year.
 

Zara

Legend
Yes, it was straight sets but he was always frail after getting thallasemia minor. That's why he chip charged to death in the late 90s.
Playing Friday, Saturday and Sunday wasn't ideal for Sampras. Also, he had a tougher road in 2001 where he had to beat Agassi in the qtr final (incredibly tight match if we all remember) and then a red hot Safin in the semi-final who beat Sampras just the year before in the same tournament, so these back to back matches took a lot out of him. And Hewitt was one of the most in-form player at that time. But regardless, surely one doesn't expect that Sampras would go down to Hewitt in straight sets especially 1-6, 1-6 in the 2nd and 3rd sets. It would have to be a complete moron who'd have to buy into this loss that Sampras wasn't tired and simply lost in that fashion - a player who arguably had the greatest serve in his story.

And from 2000 to 2002, Sampras only won 3 tournaments despite making those two USO finals. Those who followed him year in year out back then, know that Sampras was far from his prime and was really struggling to stay consistent let alone win tournaments. Both Nadal and Djokovic are on much higher level (even Federer) currently than Sampras was. It's absolutely ridiculous to even compare.

Sampras mentioned that USO was his favourite tournament even though he saw most success at Wimbledon and it then became a dear to him, but it doesn't surprise me that he did much better at USO than Wimbledon in those years given his fondness and perhaps, he was more comfortable on hard surface. He himself admitted that he didn't like grass much but once he adjusted it, it was a smooth journey for him but clearly in his mind, hard was his best surface followed by carpet.
 

Zara

Legend
I don't see anyone saying they are Fed level talents. Only that Fed wasn't exactly a shining beacon yet at the age they are now and that it's too early to write them off. Both entirely reasonable propositions.
Federer didn't start winning Majors until 2003. Sampras retired in 2002. Granted Federer beat him at Wimbledon in 2001 but he didn't win Wimbledon so I don't see the point even mentioning it as Mike tends (and some other Feds) to do. It's far worth mentioning Safin and Hewitt who were almost similar age to Federer and were able to beat Sampras in slam finals and won the tournament as well which was a big deal even though it wasn't as black and white either.

I've always maintained that Sampras' faced tougher competition at the start of his career where he had to break through a much more challenging environment (this is together with the depth of competition and surfaces that differ from each other) whereas Federer faced tougher competition from 2008 on. Right now, I am saying that the Next Gen is facing a much tougher competition similar to Sampras and yes, perhaps they are not good enough but still, I rate Nadal, Fed and Djokovic higher than Agassi, Lendl, McEnroe, Edberg etc. especially when both Nadal and Djkovic are still in form. Not 100% but surely they are still close and good enough to win the big ones.

What's interesting is that, while both Hewitt and Safin were able to beat Sampras in the USO finals where generally Sampras was tough to beat, none of these players truly materialized in the way they were hyped as the next big thing. It turns out, it was Federe who came out very strong in the end but not until 2003. So who is to say who's going to come out strong out of the Next Gen. They are probably not good enough or some may take a while or wait until at least a couple of the big 3 retire for them to truly go in that direction.
 
Last edited:
Top