Nadal vs Federer

[lazybugger]

1 minute ago, Bhai said:

did you guys remember Philippoussis & Rafter

ofcourse man. Rafter had the most amazing all round game. superb player.

Philippoussis .. hehe.. goran ivanesevic, without the grit.

[lazybugger]

Just now, tennisluvr said:

Rafter is one of my all time favorite players. Lovely guy, and a charming charming game to watch. 

That second serve of his is a dream for anyone, it was a complete banana swing. 

Rafter is one of the players that made even grass tennis worthy of watching.

[Bhai]

Just now, lazybugger said:

ofcourse man. Rafter had the most amazing all round game. superb player.

Philippoussis .. hehe.. goran ivanesevic, without the grit.

i wonder how quickly these guys faded out... might be because of sampras era??

[tennisluvr]

1 minute ago, lazybugger said:

I only mean that Murray reads the game better than any other player, and has almost all shots in his repertoire.

I don't think he's a mental midget, he just has too much going on his mind. Lack of clarity at crunch moments.

wawrinka is sehwag type. see it, hit it.

That qualifies for a lack of mental alacrity. 

Still I don't blame him, he did beyond his best. For all the hype that British sportsmen generate, he atleast stood up to it and performed. He's just not someone I would spend time watching. 

[lazybugger]

2 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Hehe yeah but you know as well as he did that that grip wasn't going to fetch him titles beyond clay. He is however very impressive, I think he took Agassi to 5 sets or something at AO(Agassi possibly the greatest AO player before Djokovic came along) and gave him a scare. 

He wasn't the fittest but yeah he was a clay specialist. Unique style of play, I don't think we can expect to see much of it going ahead. 

Also, honorable mention to Radek Stepanek. In a time of baseline bashers, he was never afraid of coming to the net and dictating from there. 

Absolutely. so many amazing players. great memories of couple decades of watching tennis. Though not much after 2007 (atleast mainstream), I watch lots of futures and challengers while I'm betting on betfair. Not much hope. I thought benoit paire had chance to improve his game. that didn't happen.

I don't expect much from the current crop. Nishikori seems to be the current standard. He's awesome, but we need variety.

 

[tennisluvr]

Just now, Bhai said:

i wonder how quickly these guys faded out... might be because of sampras era??

Rafter didnt' really fade out. He had a very successful career and was briefly(for a week) world no.1

Phillippousis wasn't in the same league, he had a terrific serve but nothing beyond that. He was called "scud" because his serve was like a missile coming in. That wouldn't be enough to beat someone like Sampras, he will take the biggest servers and break them down. 

As for Rafter, he was red hot going into the US open in 1997 and defeated Sampras in straight sets, something that shocked the greatest of experts in tennis. Repeated the feat one year down the line and beat Agassi to win the US Open again. 

His best surface however was grass and he was a regular in the last 4 or the last 2 at Wimbledon from 1999 to 2001. He was unlucky enough not to win a Wimbledon(one of the most deserving players there not to win it). He either ran into a determined Sampras or Agassi on fire, finally ran into a resolute Ivanisevic in 2001. 

[tennisluvr]

Just now, lazybugger said:

Absolutely. so many amazing players. great memories of couple decades of watching tennis. Though not much after 2007 (atleast mainstream), I watch lots of futures and challengers while I'm betting on betfair. Not much hope. I thought benoit paire had chance to improve his game. that didn't happen.

I don't expect much from the current crop. Nishikori seems to be the current standard. He's awesome, but we need variety.

 

It would be a shame if Nishikori ended up without a GS title. I think he might but then his fitness levels are fading. 

[tennisluvr]

Oh another tidbit. 

Rafter is one of the few players that enjoys a positive H2H against Roger Federer. I believe it is 5-2 in his favor. 

This was of course mostly pre 2004 which is finally when Roger came onto his own. 

[lazybugger]

4 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

That qualifies for a lack of mental alacrity. 

Still I don't blame him, he did beyond his best. For all the hype that British sportsmen generate, he atleast stood up to it and performed. He's just not someone I would spend time watching. 

I won't watch him too. people here hardly understand what I say, and try to put words into my mouth, and expect me to address their idiotic assumptions.

 

[lazybugger]

4 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Oh another tidbit. 

Rafter is one of the few players that enjoys a positive H2H against Roger Federer. I believe it is 5-2 in his favor. 

This was of course mostly pre 2004 which is finally when Roger came onto his own. 

Rafter wouldn't have done well in today's slow courts.

[tennisluvr]

1 minute ago, lazybugger said:

Rafter wouldn't have done well in today's slow courts.

Ah nope. He was a quintessential 90s player. 

[lazybugger]

13 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

That qualifies for a lack of mental alacrity. 

Still I don't blame him, he did beyond his best. For all the hype that British sportsmen generate, he atleast stood up to it and performed. He's just not someone I would spend time watching. 

I see it as a tortured genius

 

[Bhai]

12 minutes ago, tennisluvr said:

Rafter didnt' really fade out. He had a very successful career and was briefly(for a week) world no.1

Phillippousis wasn't in the same league, he had a terrific serve but nothing beyond that. He was called "scud" because his serve was like a missile coming in. That wouldn't be enough to beat someone like Sampras, he will take the biggest servers and break them down. 

As for Rafter, he was red hot going into the US open in 1997 and defeated Sampras in straight sets, something that shocked the greatest of experts in tennis. Repeated the feat one year down the line and beat Agassi to win the US Open again. 

His best surface however was grass and he was a regular in the last 4 or the last 2 at Wimbledon from 1999 to 2001. He was unlucky enough not to win a Wimbledon(one of the most deserving players there not to win it). He either ran into a determined Sampras or Agassi on fire, finally ran into a resolute Ivanisevic in 2001. 

fading out might be an aggressive word to use.

i mean to say the era he was in was dominated by sampras and to some extent agassi, like recent days of Federe & nadal's dominance. Tough for other players to get noticed.

[lazybugger]

3 minutes ago, Bhai said:

fading out might be an aggressive word to use.

i mean to say the era he was in was dominated by sampras and to some extent agassi, like recent days of Federe & nadal's dominance. Tough for other players to get noticed.

He got noticed enough. ATP decides who to use to market the game. Sampras, Agassi had the US biggies backing them.

They are awesome players, but that is how players are promoted. But people who watch the game regularly (not just the slam semi/finals), remember all of the awesome players. 

[tennisluvr]

5 minutes ago, Bhai said:

fading out might be an aggressive word to use.

i mean to say the era he was in was dominated by sampras and to some extent agassi, like recent days of Federe & nadal's dominance. Tough for other players to get noticed.

Yes but unlike today's' era 90s was mostly an era of specialists. 

Once the clay season comes you would find a plethora of clay courts specialists mostly from Spain come out of the woodwork, they would be gone by the time the grass season starts. Today's era this demarcation doesn't really exist as much due to courts being more homogenized.