Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by dangalak, Oct 4, 2012.
in their prime of course.
Blake is definitely faster, guy was a speed demon in his prime. People may vote Hewitt just because he's a defensive player and had a lot more opportunity to show off, but anyone who actually watched the two of them play would say Blake.
Prime Blake videos I watch show him IMO to be the fastest lateral mover I have seen on a court.
Pure speed- blake
Footwork, reflexes, agility- Hewitt
^^^ Yeap. Blake is clearly faster, but Hewitt's actual court movement was better.
Is Blake the fastest of all time or is there another player that was faster? What about Borg?
THIS, couldn't agree more.
Monfils is very likely the fastest ever. Borg wasn't even all that fast, his 100m time was pretty dire by his standards.
His court movement, agility and footwork made him look fast even if he wasnt the fastest in a 100 meter dash.
Blake would beat a horse on the track. Too fast/.
Blake for me is faster, but Hewitt is not far behind. These two guys are only behind Monfils and Phau for me.
Hewitt is ahead by a bit. Nadal, Monfils (just pure speed, not overall tennis movement which isnt even all that great for him), Borg and possibly Chang are all definitely faster than Hewitt though.
Completely disagree. Blake is faster than Nadal. In fact not sure if Nadal is fastr than Federer. Chang slower than Hewitt, but faster than Federer and Nadal. As I said before Monfils is the quickest.
Federer may have been more agile and nimble than Nadal, since he was never muscled. But in raw horsepower, Nadal clearly edges him and Djokovic too for that matter. (IMO)
There's another Bjorn that beats out both of them.
Phau's the fastest.
Will have to disagree with this. Nadal had more raw power and could do more with the ball once he reached it, but Federer was equally fast. Nadal is much fitter and can sprint for longer though, so I think this clouds people's judgement. Watch Federer vs Ancic or Gonzalez on a fast surface. Or if you want a direct comparison look at any of Nadal vs Fed clay matches, Wimbledon finals (not 08) and even the 09 Australian Open.
the aussie takes this one
Blake and Federer faster than Nadal? Do you remember how fast Nadal was from 05-09?
There is no doubt in my mind Blake was faster than Nadal. With Federer is pretty close and would not argue strongly either way.
Federer being faster than him indeed seems silly, but Blake was that kind of a monster. He was much less agile than Nadal though, so not as good of a defender.
I sthat me or do more famous or accomplished players always win these polls. I mean you could ask of Federer is faster than Monfils and he would probably win. :lol:
hewitt was a smoother mover around the court but for sheer bursts of speed have to go with blake...in short blake is faster but hewitt was the better mover
I agree about Blake, and I also agree that Federer is probably faster than most members here think.
None of this matters, you and I both know that Steffi was the fastest tennis player in world history.
I am quite disappointed with this poll. I can't see Hewitt beating Blake in any sort of sprinting contest. Blake would likely best any of the top four in a straight sprint, even if Nadal is able to get his behind around the court more quickly.
To help put an end to the rampant "who is faster?" threads, I suggest that we have a charity race before the Australian Open. Line up ten of the fastest looking players and see who takes it. Throw Sampras in there and we could clear up a lot of issues.
guys like prime blake and prime federer are a different kind of fast movement that nadal in his prime. they accelerate so quickly after the split step.
You think Federer accelerates more quickly? Interesting.
than who? nadal yes. federer had the better first step.
what's your take on it?
I might throw Ferrero's brief prime in there.
Well, that was more because of positioning than Nadal. He could make that first step immediately since he was in balance.
No doubt that Nadal could explode from 0-60 quicker though.
Blake is faster than Hewitt, as is Donald Young. Likewise, Monfils is the fastest player ever as he is undoubtedly the blackest man to ever play the sport. Except for Wesley Snipes... who is faster than all 3.
Monfils is actually that fast though.
What kind of fast are we talking. Fast on a track or fast on a tennis court. Monfils on a tennis court isnt even close to the fastest or best mover. In a track meet he might be. Meanwhile a giant LOL at the poster who said Federer might be faster than Nadal.
Fast on a track is also fast on a tennis court.
What you talk about is MOVEMENT.
This thread doesn't discuss movement, it discusses speed. As in, raw speed.
Speed ONLY means track speed.
Not now he isn't faster than Nadal but in his prime Federer was a great mover, one of the best. Probably not as athletic as Nadal but in terms of footwork, nobody had better footwork than Federer in his prime, including an in prime Nadal.
Well that would be part of my point. Federer had better footwork and was in many ways a more effecient mover than Nadal yet even with that he was not a better overall mover than Nadal prime to prime, and probably overall still behind (especialy taking into account clay where he is way behind). So with that said Nadal must be and was clearly ahead in raw speed, even compared to prime Federer. Anyway who knows tennis would concur with this.
Meanwhile if we are including things like footwork and efficient movement someone like Monfils would fall way down, even with his raw track speed, he almost looks clumsy at times moving on a tennis court and moving sideways or diagonally in fact, on no planet was he ever the best mover no matter how much raw track speed he had, so the clarification on what we are talking about isnt even clear. However if it is raw speed only, the only way Monfils should even be discussed, Nadal would be clearly ahead of any age or any version of Federer.
I wouldn't necessarily say that Federer is clearly behind Nadal. Could be, but not necesarily.
As I said in terms of sheer athleticism and raw speed Nadal is probably better than Federer, but a lot of that is probably due to their very different styles of play. Nadal relies on his defence and ability to get back every ball, that is what makes him great. Federer does not rely on defence the way Nadal does so it is not something that most people would talk about in reference to Federer. When people talk about what makes Federer great, it is usually, footwork, shot range and shot selection, etc. So, I agree with you that Nadal's raw speed is greater but it is also because his style of play highlights that particular feature of his game more so than it would for a Federer type player.
I would have to say blake for pure foot speed. Although Hewitt covered the court better than anyone in his day, and Blake wasn't interested in hanging back.
Yohan Blake>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>James Blake>>>>>>>Lleyton Hewitt
Federer? Nadal? Davydenko? Coria? :twisted:
:shock: NO WAY :lol:
Those players were not a part of "Hewitt's day", which I am sure refers to his time on top of his and the mens game, except for a young Federer. Coria only moved better on clay. Davydenko no way moved better than Hewitt regardless.
Neither. The Rocket is always faster.
Do you have a poster of him on your ceiling?
So what if he does. 95% of the posters here have a poster of Federer, a picture of Federer in their wallet, a projector that gives an image of Federer on their wall at night, and a marriage proposal to Federer (regardless of gender) they carry in their pocket to each tournament they attend he might be in.
Not even close.
At least they only overrate him in threads where he is tangentially related. :lol:
Again it is evident you are new around here.
Hewitt could get to more shots than Blake.
Separate names with a comma.