Who is the better grass court player, Roddick or Djokovic?

[Razer]

You're still not getting it. Djokovic is miles superior than Stan on all surfaces. Wawrinka is not a player who peak/prime Djokovic should lose to at the Australian Open, or Roland Garros, or Wimbledon, or the US Open. But guess what? Peak/prime Djokovic lost to Stan at the Australian Open, and Roland Garros, and the US Open...two of those losses in finals. All evidence points towards a Nole loss had they met at Wimbledon.

Wawrinka requires time for his strokes that hit through his opponents, on grass there never is that kind of time for him to do that since reaction time is lowest and his movement is not good enough for grass, he himself said this in an interview once. So the scenario you are saying is imaginary. Aus open used to be pretty slow when he did well, even with some matchup advantage to Novak he isn't ever beating him at wimbledon.

None of the Novak fans hate Wawrinka despite his wins but everyone knows he has nothing on Grass.

 

[duaneeo]

Wawrinka requires time for his strokes that hit through his opponents, on grass there never is that kind of time for him to do that since reaction time is lowest and his movement is not good enough for grass, he himself said this in an interview once. So the scenario you are saying is imaginary. Aus open used to be pretty slow when he did well, even with some matchup advantage to Novak he isn't ever beating him at wimbledon.

Beat-up/semifinal grass would've been fine for Wawrinka...especially against a player with a mental block against him at the slams.

 

[NoleFam]

In 2012 there was no significant difference in his serve quality compared to 2009. The later years would be from 2014 on. And Roddick isn't a great returner, particularly in comparison to Djokovic, but that's not a point I'm arguing.

If you know that Roddick made it close because of his amazing serve on the day, 75% first serves, why not give that context while citing the 21% RPW stat?

Perhaps I have to clarify that I'm not saying Roddick in 2009 was nearly as tough a challenge as peak Djokovic at Wimbledon. But there's definitely a difference between saying that vs making a snide comment that highlights a single underwhelming stat of Roddick's play, no context, making it seem like Federer struggled to beat a very poorly playing opponent. The latter is what I responded to.

Probably because Roddick is one of the best ever in serving stats so it's obvious how great his serve is to anyone with basic knowledge about tennis so it doesn't need to be explained.

I never said his opponent was poor or even implied it; I implied his return was poor and it was, especially for a match of that length.

 

[NoleFam]

Federer Wim 2009 final vs Djokovic Wim 2011 final?

:unsure:

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Wim 2009 final vs Wim 2015 final?

Which slam final was better quality?

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

But he's never seen this before...lol

 

[The Fedfather]

But he's never seen this before...lol

For 2009 vs 2015 the thread is about the match quality, not which winner played at a higher level/how they compare.

2011 wasn't peak Djokovic at Wimby and still nobody said he'd get crushed by Federer. Lol on you.

 

[NoleFam]

For 2009 vs 2015 the thread is about the match quality, not which winner played at a higher level/how they compare.

2011 wasn't peak Djokovic at Wimby and still nobody said he'd get crushed by Federer. Lol on you.

Im talking about 2009 Federer versus 2015 Federer, and just 1 look at the 1st page and I saw someone say 2009 Federer would win. It was also said in this thread which is one I particularly remember:

Peak Djokovic vs Peak Murray on grass who wins?

So basically the 9th best version of Federer is better than the best version of Djokovic? I didn't say 2012 Fed is 9th best version (not sure I ever ranked them). For me, 2003/2004 Fed was a notch above on grass, his other title runs (excluding 2017 win over crying Marin) were somewhat similar...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

It's been said on here numerous times over the years so exactly how have you never seen this on here and seemingly so surprised?

 

[The Fedfather]

Im talking about 2009 Federer versus 2015 Federer, and just 1 look at the 1st page and I saw someone say 2009 Federer would win. It was also said in this thread which is one I particularly remember:

Peak Djokovic vs Peak Murray on grass who wins?

So basically the 9th best version of Federer is better than the best version of Djokovic? I didn't say 2012 Fed is 9th best version (not sure I ever ranked them). For me, 2003/2004 Fed was a notch above on grass, his other title runs (excluding 2017 win over crying Marin) were somewhat similar...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

It's been said on here numerous times over the years so exactly how have you never seen this on here and seemingly so surprised?

Can you point me to the actual comment?

Point taken with metsman, but that's one poster and what, 2-3 comments? Is that really such a surprise someone wouldn't see it?

 

[abmk]

Number of ATG rivals for Roger Federer born between 1 September 1971 and 1st June 1986 = 0 Great Rivals in 15 years
Number of ATG rivals for Novak & Rafa born between 1987 & 2002/2003 = 0 Great Rivals in 15-16 years

The dearth of talent to face Roger between birth years of Pete & Rafa was balanced by the dearth of talent between Novak & Sinner/Alcaraz.

God is never unfair, you thought you could get away with all those years when your hero butchered the field like there was no tomorrow, nature countered it with the Serbian and the Spaniard butchering some fields of their own. In the end all those MPs dropped in crucial situations and the late racquet change has really cost Roger dearly, sorry, can't help it.... Justice has been done fair and square.

Number of ATG rivals for Roger Federer younger to him: 2
Number of ATG rivals for Novak & Rafa younger to them both: 0

Federer's generation of Hewitt/Safin/Roddick/Ferrero etc >>>>>>>>>>>>> rao-nishi-dimi gen and med-z-tpas gen. It'd be a joke to compare.
prime Roddick/Hewitt would be crushing/stomping Djokovic (&Nadal) of Wim 19-current.
Fed started facing Nadal from 2005 itself.

2004-07 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-2022
2004,05,07 were all pretty good years. You'd know if you watched, but hey when you indulge in Djoko fanboysim, you don't want to watch much tennis prior to 2011 or so.

Oh and 2004-06 > 2014-16 (by some distance)
2007-09 > 2011-13 (by a small margin)

and this is even before Djokovic took advantage as much as he did from 2018-current.

Edit: not getting into God's justice/karma over lifetimes (not single lifetime) and such things, when you can't admit much simpler tangible things.

 

[Razer]

Number of ATG rivals for Roger Federer younger to him: 2
Number of ATG rivals for Novak & Rafa younger to them both: 0

Federer's generation of Hewitt/Safin/Roddick/Ferrero etc >>>>>>>>>>>>> rao-nishi-dimi gen and med-z-tpas gen. It'd be a joke to compare.
prime Roddick/Hewitt would be crushing/stomping Djokovic (&Nadal) of Wim 19-current.
Fed started facing Nadal from 2005 itself.

2004-07 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-2022
2004,05,07 were all pretty good years. You'd know if you watched, but hey when you indulge in Djoko fanboysim, you don't want to watch much tennis prior to 2011 or so.

Oh and 2004-06 > 2014-16 (by some distance)
2007-09 > 2011-13 (by a small margin)

and this is even before Djokovic took advantage as much as he did from 2018-current.

Edit: not getting into God's justice/karma over lifetimes (not single lifetime) and such things, when you can't admit much simpler tangible things.

Number of ATGs younger to Roger = 2
Number of ATGs same age or slightly older to Nole/Rafa = 2 each for them, both Nadal & Nole have each other throughout their lives and they have Fed till 2019 who was causing problems for them as late as wimbledon 2019.

It is well balanced.

Rafa came a bit before his actual peak (2008), Federer stayed a bit after Nole's actual peak ended (2016), whatever happened in between is the strong era 08-16. This inflation after 16 and some inflation before 08 is balanced, you will never accept it but Federer would never have won all those slams if there was someone as great as him aged same or just a few months older/younger than him was present while he was growing up, dude look at the players from 1972 to1986, most of them are injured or moody people, except Roger all of them quickly ended their careers, you might say these are technically better than the Zverevs/Raos/Thiems/Kyrgios/Medvedevs but those players grew up pre internet and these men of the so called CIE are in the smartphones era, thus the skill gap maybe but it evens out on the whole. Safin was a party animal, Hewitt was tiny and not suited for the grind of the baseline era, Roddick was not that talented as Roger, Dave Nalby had fitness issues, Blake, Davydeko, Gonzo etc etc were again not that great, Kuerten was already injured and finished by 2004, Pete was retired, Andre running on fumes, Philippoussis & Henman again not great players to pose challenge and their style of play got outdated too..... then the 5-6 years age gap ensured that Nadal was yet to mature on HCs to be a slam contender, Nole and Murray were little babies, Nadal you say was in prime on grass in 06 but we know he reached the final due to a weak field, it was 07 when he reached is prime & peak both at the same time, thus the "vacuum" which former greats like Wilander, Kuerten described is here to see. These players might be better than 90s gen but not by a big margin, the Big 3 would maul them alll anyway and that is what hapened, Roger did it before 07-08 and Nole-Rafa are doing it in the 16-22 phase, by the way why do you use 16-22 ? You should use 19-22 maybe, 17 & 18 was exploited by Roger himself who won 3 slams and rose to 1 in this period. The vacuum is only 21-22 if you ask me, till 2020 FO most of the slams had good tennis. 2020 USO & 21 + 22 years can be said to be bad, before that it is pretty awesome whether you accept it or not.

 

[abmk]

Number of ATGs younger to Roger = 2
Number of ATGs same age or slightly older to Nole/Rafa = 2 each for them, both Nadal & Nole have each other throughout their lives and Fed till 2019.

It is well balanced.

erm, number of ATGs same age or slightly older/younger for Nadal/Djoko = 1 each, not 2.
is it that much fail at math or just so much involved in propaganda that you lose sight?

Rafa came a bit before his actual peak (2008), Federer stayed a bit after Nole's actual peak ended (2016), whatever happened in between is the strong era 08-16. This inflation after 16 and some inflation before 08 is balanced, you will never accept it but Federer would never have won all those slams if there was someone as great as him aged same or just a few months older/younger than him was present while he was growing up, dude look at the players from 1972 to1986, most of them are injured or moody people, except Roger all of them quickly ended their careers, you might say these are technically better than the Zverevs/Raos/Thiems/Kyrgios/Medvedevs but those players grew up pre internet and these men of the so called CIE are in the smartphones era, thus the skill gap maybe but it evens out on the whole. Safin was a party animal, Hewitt was tiny and not suited for the grind of the baseline era, Roddick was not that talented as Roger, Dave Nalby had fitness issues, Blake, Davydeko, Gonzo etc etc were again not that great, Kuerten was already injured and finished by 2004, Pete was retired, Andre running on fumes, Philippoussis & Henman again not great players to pose challenge and their style of play got outdated too..... then the 5-6 years age gap ensured that Nadal was yet to mature on HCs to be a slam contender, Nole and Murray were little babies, Nadal you say was in prime on grass in 06 but we know he reached the final due to a weak field, it was 07 when he reached is prime & peak both at the same time, thus the "vacuum" which former greats like Wilander, Kuerten described is here to see. These players might be better than 90s gen but not by a big margin, the Big 3 would maul them alll anyway and that is what hapened, Roger did it before 07-08 and Nole-Rafa are doing it in the 16-22 phase, by the way why do you use 16-22 ? You should use 19-22 maybe, 17 & 18 was exploited by Roger himself who won 3 slams and rose to 1 in this period. The vacuum is only 21-22 if you ask me, till 2020 FO most of the slams had good tennis. 2020 USO & 22 + 22 years can be said to be bad, before that it is pretty awesome whether you accept it or not.

Hewitt was perfectly fine for baseline era. Showed that in 04-05.
Like I said Hewitt/Roddick/Safin/ Ferrero etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the worst gens. its not maybe, technically etc,. sh*t.
the 2nd tier players of that gen - Davy,Nalby, Ferrer etc are comparable to first tier of the worst generations.
that generation is MUCH better in EVERY single way. its a joke to compare.
physically, technically, mentally

04-05 also had Agassi on HC.

yes, nadal was prime on grass in 06. its one of his 6 best years at Wimbledon (06-08,10-11,18). Try disputing that. As is Djokovic was the one who benefitted on grass from Nadal going AWOL in 2012-16. the so called weak field in Wim 06 draw had Baggy in the semi (who had beaten Hewitt) and trouble Djokovic even in 2011. Nadal straight-setted that Baggy. I'm not saying it was anywhere near tough. But to pretend Nadal didn't play well after the R2 scare vs Kendrick, that he didn't play peak fed tough in the middle 2 sets is just BS.

the reason why I use 2016-22 is because every year in 16-22 is weaker than every other year in this century prior(save maybe 2002). Federer only really picked up slams in 17-early 18 in that and out of that AO 17 was probably the toughest draw in that entire period. Not comparable to djoko/nadal winning 9-11 whatever slams in the same period.

again a joke to call 2008-16 as strong era. 2007 was similar to 2008.
2016 was clearly weak.
2015 relatively weak just as 2006, so was 2010.

2004,05 thrash 2015 difficulty wise let alone 2016.

I'll maybe respond to you once more maximum and I'm done with you You go to the ignore list. You calling 2008-16 as strong is the last straw. You are utterly shameless sprouting shameless stuff again and again to further your Djokobotian agenda with different profiles again and again.

 

[RS]

8 is enough, let them level. 9 would be a bit too much, that I agree, 8 is fine, he should anyway be on 8 now since wimbledon 2020 was cancelled.

 

[RS]

Im talking about 2009 Federer versus 2015 Federer, and just 1 look at the 1st page and I saw someone say 2009 Federer would win. It was also said in this thread which is one I particularly remember:

Peak Djokovic vs Peak Murray on grass who wins?

So basically the 9th best version of Federer is better than the best version of Djokovic? I didn't say 2012 Fed is 9th best version (not sure I ever ranked them). For me, 2003/2004 Fed was a notch above on grass, his other title runs (excluding 2017 win over crying Marin) were somewhat similar...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

It's been said on here numerous times over the years so exactly how have you never seen this on here and seemingly so surprised?

I forgot I had that thread

 

[TMF]

I forgot I had that thread

Please just let this thread die since it has turned into Roddick basher thread

 

[RS]

Please just let this thread die since it has turned into Roddick basher thread

I will leave it next time.