The Official Tennis Thread

Started by Doogie Browser, January 26, 2010, 11:25:28 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

gallsman

Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 01:42:01 PM
Murray is doing well at the minute but it seems that his recent run of succes would have a lot to do with the state of mens tennis at the minute.  Its been a long number of years since there has been as few top, top players who are really challenging for titles.  At the minute you really only have Federer who has been on the slide the past few years and Djokovic to compete with to win the majors.  Nadal has been out for so long that it is doubtful if he will come back as good as he was, he will probably suffer a similar fate to Lleyton Hewitt in that the way they both played the game ultimately causes several serious enough injuries which reduce the atheltic ability they require to play such an intense style.

Nonsense. Currently, Nadal's injury aside, you have four players (yes, including Andy Murray) who equally competive across all surfaces and are likely to go down as some of the greatest in history. At the end of their careers, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic could be 1, 2 and 3 in any order.

I wouldn't rule Nadal out just yet - he's a far superior tennis player and athlete than Hewitt ever was. He was out for a lengthy period following his loss in the the French in June 2009, came back in the US in September and made the semis while clearly not in the best shape. In 2010 he went on to have the best year of his career. His knees and the tendonitis have been worries for years and I think the team are making 100% sure he's over it before bringing him back. If he comes back as expected in the next few months he'll hope to get a few hard court tournaments going in the States to find his was back before trying to gain competitiveness and confidence during the clay court season.

nrico2006

Quote from: gallsman on January 25, 2013, 02:12:59 PM
Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 01:42:01 PM
Murray is doing well at the minute but it seems that his recent run of succes would have a lot to do with the state of mens tennis at the minute.  Its been a long number of years since there has been as few top, top players who are really challenging for titles.  At the minute you really only have Federer who has been on the slide the past few years and Djokovic to compete with to win the majors.  Nadal has been out for so long that it is doubtful if he will come back as good as he was, he will probably suffer a similar fate to Lleyton Hewitt in that the way they both played the game ultimately causes several serious enough injuries which reduce the atheltic ability they require to play such an intense style.

Nonsense. Currently, Nadal's injury aside, you have four players (yes, including Andy Murray) who equally competive across all surfaces and are likely to go down as some of the greatest in history. At the end of their careers, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic could be 1, 2 and 3 in any order.

I wouldn't rule Nadal out just yet - he's a far superior tennis player and athlete than Hewitt ever was. He was out for a lengthy period following his loss in the the French in June 2009, came back in the US in September and made the semis while clearly not in the best shape. In 2010 he went on to have the best year of his career. His knees and the tendonitis have been worries for years and I think the team are making 100% sure he's over it before bringing him back. If he comes back as expected in the next few months he'll hope to get a few hard court tournaments going in the States to find his was back before trying to gain competitiveness and confidence during the clay court season.

of the four you are talking about, Federer is past his best and Nadal has been out for a long time as you mentioned.  The past year has seen Murray do better and I would say that its been made easier due to Nadals absence and Federer's slide.  Its really been Djokovic v Murray and apart from the top 4 there is a level playing field of averageness below them.  Compare that to 10 or 20 years ago when you had a lot of top quality players.  Nadal and Federer will go down as all time greats, Djokovic has a lot to do yet to get into that bracket but I feel he could well do it and Murray hasn't a hope of being remembered as an all time great.
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

gallsman

Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 02:32:44 PM
Quote from: gallsman on January 25, 2013, 02:12:59 PM
Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 01:42:01 PM
Murray is doing well at the minute but it seems that his recent run of succes would have a lot to do with the state of mens tennis at the minute.  Its been a long number of years since there has been as few top, top players who are really challenging for titles.  At the minute you really only have Federer who has been on the slide the past few years and Djokovic to compete with to win the majors.  Nadal has been out for so long that it is doubtful if he will come back as good as he was, he will probably suffer a similar fate to Lleyton Hewitt in that the way they both played the game ultimately causes several serious enough injuries which reduce the atheltic ability they require to play such an intense style.

Nonsense. Currently, Nadal's injury aside, you have four players (yes, including Andy Murray) who equally competive across all surfaces and are likely to go down as some of the greatest in history. At the end of their careers, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic could be 1, 2 and 3 in any order.

I wouldn't rule Nadal out just yet - he's a far superior tennis player and athlete than Hewitt ever was. He was out for a lengthy period following his loss in the the French in June 2009, came back in the US in September and made the semis while clearly not in the best shape. In 2010 he went on to have the best year of his career. His knees and the tendonitis have been worries for years and I think the team are making 100% sure he's over it before bringing him back. If he comes back as expected in the next few months he'll hope to get a few hard court tournaments going in the States to find his was back before trying to gain competitiveness and confidence during the clay court season.

of the four you are talking about, Federer is past his best and Nadal has been out for a long time as you mentioned.  The past year has seen Murray do better and I would say that its been made easier due to Nadals absence and Federer's slide.  Its really been Djokovic v Murray and apart from the top 4 there is a level playing field of averageness below them.  Compare that to 10 or 20 years ago when you had a lot of top quality players.  Nadal and Federer will go down as all time greats, Djokovic has a lot to do yet to get into that bracket but I feel he could well do it and Murray hasn't a hope of being remembered as an all time great.

Ten years ago, Sampras was finished and Agassi was in his twilight years. Federer, Hewitt, Safin and Roddick were the rising stars. Hewitt fell away fairly quickly after a blistering couple of years and Safin never had the mental strength to be the player he should have been. Roddick was never quite at the level required and while he probably deserved a Wimbledon title here or there, his game was limited.

In the last 20 years, the only players who can be considered on a par with the likes of Nadal, Federer and Djokovic were Agassi and Sampras. Sampras couldn't compete on clay and Agassi wasted what should have been his best years. Pat Rafter was the player who probably came closest to the pair of them.

Djokovic has very little to do to get himself into the all time bracket. He's been the undisputed best player in the world for nigh on two years and in 2011 put together one of the most spectacular season's in memory.

Federer may be past his best but he is still consistently excellent and on his day can beat absolutely anyone.

Murray's 2012 was largely due to Nadal being injured? Horseshit - Murray has beaten Nadal in his prime on multiple occasions, including Grand Slams. He convincingly won his first GS and picked up an Olympic gold - mere weeks after being devastated at losing to Federer in the Wimbledon final. While Murray hasn't had the sustained success of the other 3, the talent is clearly there for him to be a multiple grand slam champion. As for him "not having a hope" of being an all-time great, you're talking through your arse. He routinely hands out whippings to the other three and in turn, they are the only ones who routinely whip him. You have four absolutely outstanding players at the top and you claim men's tennis was in a better state in the 90s. Laughable.

Wee Roddy

That is a great posts gallsman. I agree entirely. Absolute horseshit

nrico2006

I didn't say Murray only won in 2012 because of Nadal being injured, but obviously it was a huge help because there would have been a good chance of them facing each other and Nadal has a brilliant record against Murray, only losing a few times whilst racking up a lot of wins. 

Throughout the 90's you had a group of players along with Sampras and Agassi challenging at the top on the various surfaces in mens tennis with the like of Edberg, Chang, Becker, Stich, Courier, Martin, Muster, Ivanisevic, Brugera, Rafter, Moya, Kafelnikov and Rios.  At the minute the standard of player is not as high, and my point was that Murray is in position now where he has only a fading Federer and Djokovic to compete against.  Djokovic has had a brilliant few years but he would need another few grand slams to be talked about as an all time great.
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

muppet

Quote from: gallsman on January 25, 2013, 02:48:08 PM
Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 02:32:44 PM
Quote from: gallsman on January 25, 2013, 02:12:59 PM
Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 01:42:01 PM
Murray is doing well at the minute but it seems that his recent run of succes would have a lot to do with the state of mens tennis at the minute.  Its been a long number of years since there has been as few top, top players who are really challenging for titles.  At the minute you really only have Federer who has been on the slide the past few years and Djokovic to compete with to win the majors.  Nadal has been out for so long that it is doubtful if he will come back as good as he was, he will probably suffer a similar fate to Lleyton Hewitt in that the way they both played the game ultimately causes several serious enough injuries which reduce the atheltic ability they require to play such an intense style.

Nonsense. Currently, Nadal's injury aside, you have four players (yes, including Andy Murray) who equally competive across all surfaces and are likely to go down as some of the greatest in history. At the end of their careers, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic could be 1, 2 and 3 in any order.

I wouldn't rule Nadal out just yet - he's a far superior tennis player and athlete than Hewitt ever was. He was out for a lengthy period following his loss in the the French in June 2009, came back in the US in September and made the semis while clearly not in the best shape. In 2010 he went on to have the best year of his career. His knees and the tendonitis have been worries for years and I think the team are making 100% sure he's over it before bringing him back. If he comes back as expected in the next few months he'll hope to get a few hard court tournaments going in the States to find his was back before trying to gain competitiveness and confidence during the clay court season.

of the four you are talking about, Federer is past his best and Nadal has been out for a long time as you mentioned.  The past year has seen Murray do better and I would say that its been made easier due to Nadals absence and Federer's slide.  Its really been Djokovic v Murray and apart from the top 4 there is a level playing field of averageness below them.  Compare that to 10 or 20 years ago when you had a lot of top quality players.  Nadal and Federer will go down as all time greats, Djokovic has a lot to do yet to get into that bracket but I feel he could well do it and Murray hasn't a hope of being remembered as an all time great.

Ten years ago, Sampras was finished and Agassi was in his twilight years. Federer, Hewitt, Safin and Roddick were the rising stars. Hewitt fell away fairly quickly after a blistering couple of years and Safin never had the mental strength to be the player he should have been. Roddick was never quite at the level required and while he probably deserved a Wimbledon title here or there, his game was limited.

In the last 20 years, the only players who can be considered on a par with the likes of Nadal, Federer and Djokovic were Agassi and Sampras. Sampras couldn't compete on clay and Agassi wasted what should have been his best years. Pat Rafter was the player who probably came closest to the pair of them.

Djokovic has very little to do to get himself into the all time bracket. He's been the undisputed best player in the world for nigh on two years and in 2011 put together one of the most spectacular season's in memory.

Federer may be past his best but he is still consistently excellent and on his day can beat absolutely anyone.

Murray's 2012 was largely due to Nadal being injured? Horseshit - Murray has beaten Nadal in his prime on multiple occasions, including Grand Slams. He convincingly won his first GS and picked up an Olympic gold - mere weeks after being devastated at losing to Federer in the Wimbledon final. While Murray hasn't had the sustained success of the other 3, the talent is clearly there for him to be a multiple grand slam champion. As for him "not having a hope" of being an all-time great, you're talking through your arse. He routinely hands out whippings to the other three and in turn, they are the only ones who routinely whip him. You have four absolutely outstanding players at the top and you claim men's tennis was in a better state in the 90s. Laughable.

+1
MWWSI 2017

mouview

Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 02:32:44 PM
Quote from: gallsman on January 25, 2013, 02:12:59 PM
Quote from: nrico2006 on January 25, 2013, 01:42:01 PM
Murray is doing well at the minute but it seems that his recent run of succes would have a lot to do with the state of mens tennis at the minute.  Its been a long number of years since there has been as few top, top players who are really challenging for titles.  At the minute you really only have Federer who has been on the slide the past few years and Djokovic to compete with to win the majors.  Nadal has been out for so long that it is doubtful if he will come back as good as he was, he will probably suffer a similar fate to Lleyton Hewitt in that the way they both played the game ultimately causes several serious enough injuries which reduce the atheltic ability they require to play such an intense style.

Nonsense. Currently, Nadal's injury aside, you have four players (yes, including Andy Murray) who equally competive across all surfaces and are likely to go down as some of the greatest in history. At the end of their careers, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic could be 1, 2 and 3 in any order.

I wouldn't rule Nadal out just yet - he's a far superior tennis player and athlete than Hewitt ever was. He was out for a lengthy period following his loss in the the French in June 2009, came back in the US in September and made the semis while clearly not in the best shape. In 2010 he went on to have the best year of his career. His knees and the tendonitis have been worries for years and I think the team are making 100% sure he's over it before bringing him back. If he comes back as expected in the next few months he'll hope to get a few hard court tournaments going in the States to find his was back before trying to gain competitiveness and confidence during the clay court season.

of the four you are talking about, Federer is past his best and Nadal has been out for a long time as you mentioned.  The past year has seen Murray do better and I would say that its been made easier due to Nadals absence and Federer's slide.  Its really been Djokovic v Murray and apart from the top 4 there is a level playing field of averageness below them.  Compare that to 10 or 20 years ago when you had a lot of top quality players.  Nadal and Federer will go down as all time greats, Djokovic has a lot to do yet to get into that bracket but I feel he could well do it and Murray hasn't a hope of being remembered as an all time great.

Oh no, surely not. Nadal a fine player and virtually unbeatable in Paris, but Djoko has beaten him on clay, and his game relies so much on power that it was inevitable that he would suffer injury at some point in his career. I think Fed and Djoko are ahead of him in tennis ability and the latter has really moved into the realms of the great over the past couple of years, c. 2011 season and wins over Nadal in Oz last year and Wawrinka this year; a ferocious and durable competitor to say the least.


Rois

So Murray is a set up and second is going with serve, though Murray should have taken Djok's first game. Really hope Murray wins this.

Tony Baloney

Quote from: Rois on January 27, 2013, 10:24:19 AM
So Murray is a set up and second is going with serve, though Murray should have taken Djok's first game. Really hope Murray wins this.
I really hope he doesn't.

theticklemister

If he wins he is British

If he loses he's Scottish

Rois

I realize I'm in a tiny minority who always supports Murray.

BennyHarp

Quote from: theticklemister on January 27, 2013, 10:31:52 AM
If he wins he is British

If he loses he's Scottish

This must be the most boring phrase in sport!
That was never a square ball!!

theticklemister

Quote from: BennyHarp on January 27, 2013, 10:52:14 AM
Quote from: theticklemister on January 27, 2013, 10:31:52 AM
If he wins he is British

If he loses he's Scottish

This must be the most boring phrase in sport!

Still works my old mucker!!!

Minder

Djokovic too good today, he looked fresher at the end than at the start.
"When it's too tough for them, it's just right for us"