HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Sports > General Sports
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
General Sports Other sports without their own forum, and general sports talk

2012 Wimbledon

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-08-2012, 05:58 PM
  #501
Deficient Mode
Step with me
 
Deficient Mode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 42,314
vCash: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
Jon Wertheim at CNNSI made a comment similar to the one I did earlier in this thread (I swear I didn't steal it from him first):



This was basically the point I was trying to make: losing to Rosol doesn't really hurt Nadal's personal all-time legacy but it does stand out in a Slams comparison against Federer, which is relevant for the GOAT discussion.
See, I don't think it stands out or changes things that much. It was already really clear that Nadal vs. the field is significantly worse than Federer vs. the field. The head-to-head is the only advantage Nadal has on Federer. Still, not a match I'll easily forget.

Deficient Mode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 06:29 PM
  #502
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,256
vCash: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
At this point Laver is really the only other name I could see a legitimate argument for, maybe Borg. Nadal's name has been thrown out there, partly based on projection (i.e. the assumption he could tie or pass Fed in total Slams) and then the other main components are being the best clay-court player ever (agreed) and his head-to-head record against Federer (which is notable but I think of lesser importance in a GOAT debate). The big differences to me between Nadal and Federer are:

-consistency across surfaces: Federer is top 5 ever on clay courts and it's mind-boggling to think of how many majors he'd have won with even a slightly lesser clay court player than Nadal in the same era, in addition to being top 3 on grass and hardcourts (arguably #1 on both). Nadal's improvements on those two surfaces seemed to many to coincide (at least at the Slams) with them slowing down, and he's nowhere near the top 5 ever on either.

-results when not winning: I don't see Nadal even touching Federer's marks for quarterfinals, semi-finals, and finals appearances, or his various consecutive streaks. And when was the last time Federer lost to a 100th-ranked player, much less at a Slam?
The more you dig the more Federer looks good.

Federer's consistancy is supreme.Nadal's hardcourt career is very weak for a supposely G.O.A.T. candidate , while even if Federer has only one french open , he has many finals that he lost against the greatest clay-courter of all-time.Federer is simply always there in the end giving himself a chance , so it's easy to criticize him when he lose on the big stage while his opponants are sometimes taking a day off early in tournaments and gets eliminated.

Borg didn't do anything that would qualify him as Federer's equal.Sampras don't have nothing on Federer either , while Federer's clay career is massively superior.Basically Federer is a genius of tennis , always giving himself a chance , the strongest mentally to be able to reach the end of grand slams with that consistancy.

We have to remember that tennis is a sport for the youth , it's not like hockey , players are peaking very early and slow down more quickly than other sports.Nadal and Djokovic are still relatively young and you see that Federer is there agai nat 30 years old competing and taking over the n1 ranking and grand slams tournament.This is extraordinary.Federer really is the greatest active professionnal athlete on earth in my opinion.

BenchBrawl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 06:36 PM
  #503
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,256
vCash: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Let's keep this discussion grounded in reality. The only reason why Nadal didn't make the finals at Wimbledon in 2009, and win in all likelihood, is because he didn't play. To pretend he lost like you are is incredibly disingenuous. Nadal appeared in every Wimbledon final he played in from 2006-2011.
Talking about reality , let's talk about the reality of the kind of game Nadal is playing in tennis.A game that is extremely hard on the knees , and because of that game he's sometimes incredibly hard to beat because he covers al lcourt , but sometimes he has to miss a grand slam because of it or as an excuse when he loses.Federer's 30 years old and he never missed a grand slam since I don't even know when.His game is not only good in the short term and it's so fluid and elegant that it's also good for the long-term.Federer's tennis IQ is the simply off the charts.His foot work is the best i've ever seen.

BenchBrawl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 07:30 PM
  #504
Cruiser008
Registered User
 
Cruiser008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,487
vCash: 500
WOOOOO!!!

Fed back at #1 and winning his long-awaited 7th Wimby. How sweet it is!

Cruiser008 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 08:19 PM
  #505
vsk92
Alltid IFK
 
vsk92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Scotland.
Country: Finland
Posts: 7,439
vCash: 500
Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer so let's how many titles both have won on all courts after they retire, I think Nadal will win more than Federer

vsk92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 08:21 PM
  #506
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsk92 View Post
Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer so let's how many titles both have won on all courts after they retire, I think Nadal will win more than Federer
It will be interesting to see, that's for sure. Rafa's style of play does not bode well for a long career. He doesn't play as many tourneys as he did before which is smart, but he still grinds out every single point. That's a lot of wear and tear and he's had knee issues for years.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:55 PM
  #507
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsk92 View Post
Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer so let's how many titles both have won on all courts after they retire, I think Nadal will win more than Federer
How many have won 7 Grand Slams after turning 26?

Uncle Rotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 02:00 AM
  #508
Corto
Faceless Man
 
Corto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Braavos
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Rotter View Post
How many have won 7 Grand Slams after turning 26?
Problem is, the "rest" are nowhere near as good as in the Sampras/Agassi era.

Throughout their careers, Sampras and Agassi had to face Becker, Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Rafter, Guga, Muster and Courier (on clay), etc.
You also need to remember that a player like Rafa would probably have a much rougher time at Wimbledon in 94 (for example), when the balls and the courts were much faster.

Outside of Murray, after JMDP's injury, sadly there just isn't anyone on the horizon who seems like they could win a Slam.

...

Regardless of anything, though...
Enjoying the moment right now.
I still think Sampras and Federer are hard to compare (like I said, different surfaces, different competition), but Roger is definitely my favorite player of all time (outside of Ivanisevic) and watching him is a treat and a privilege.

Corto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 02:32 AM
  #509
Deficient Mode
Step with me
 
Deficient Mode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 42,314
vCash: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsk92 View Post
Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer so let's how many titles both have won on all courts after they retire, I think Nadal will win more than Federer
You mean overall titles? Or just slams? He hasn't won any title off clay in 21 months, and he's not going to get better in the next four years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corto View Post
Problem is, the "rest" are nowhere near as good as in the Sampras/Agassi era.

Throughout their careers, Sampras and Agassi had to face Becker, Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Rafter, Guga, Muster and Courier (on clay), etc.
You also need to remember that a player like Rafa would probably have a much rougher time at Wimbledon in 94 (for example), when the balls and the courts were much faster.

Outside of Murray, after JMDP's injury, sadly there just isn't anyone on the horizon who seems like they could win a Slam.
This is another aspect of the weak era argument people overlook. There were great young players (Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro) coming up when Fed started to decline who kept him in check. The young players today just don't stack up at all.

Deficient Mode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 06:58 AM
  #510
kihei
Registered User
 
kihei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,799
vCash: 3202
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsk92 View Post
Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer so let's how many titles both have won on all courts after they retire, I think Nadal will win more than Federer
After 27 years of age, Rafa is not likely to win a lot more slams. Here's some info I looked up in 2010. No anomalies occurred since then until Roger won yesterday. Updated where noted.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With people talking about how many more Grand Slams Federer might win, I checked out the number of Grand Slams won by male players, 28 and over, during the past 26 (now 28) years (1984 to 2012). Conclusion: most players are washed up by 28 and winning a Grand Slam at that age is very unlikely unless you are Andre Agassi.

Number of Grand Slams played in that period: 111
(updated)
Number of Grand Slams won by players 28 and over: 15 (updated)

Players who accomplished this feat:

Agassi 5 ('99 French, '99 US, '01, 01, '03 Australian)
Federer 2 (’10 Australian, '12 Wimbledon) (updated)
Sampras 2 ('00 Wimbledon, '02 US)
Lendl 2 ('98, '90 Australian)
Ivanisevic 1 ('01 Wimbledon)
Korda 1 ('98 Australian)
Becker 1 ('96 Australian)
Gomez 1 ('90 French)

Agassi is obviously a special case, with 5 of his 8 Grand Slams coming after reaching the age of 28.

If we eliminate Andre, only 10 times has it happened in the quarter century plus. With the exception of Andre, it is a rare feat.

(This following section has not been updated, but the numbers aren't likely to have dramatically changed in the past year and a half): I also got curious about the average age of Grand Slam winners, so I did two compilations: one an average for the ten years previous to Federer’s first Slam, 1993 to 2002 (Why those years? Because once Federer and Nadal appear on the scene, there’s not much of a sample to test in terms of other players winning Slams). I also did a sample including all years since ’93 (to 2010), excluding the big fish, Federer, Nadal, Sampras and Agassi, so as to get a better sense of how mere mortals do.

In the ten year sample, previous to Federer’s first Slam in 2003, here are the average ages of Grand Slam winners for each of the four majors (this includes Sampras and Agassi’s titles during this period):

Australian: 26.2
French: 24.8
Wimbledon: 25.3
US: 24.4
Overall average of Grand Slam winner: 25.1 years of age

--------------

Excluding the Big Four (Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Agassi), 1993 to present (2010), the average age of the other 26 Grand Slam winners in this period is almost exactly 24 years of age.

The breakdown for this group (again excluding the Big Four) is:

30+ year olds: 0 (Petr Korda. ’98 Australian Open winner, missed by a few days)
28/29 years old: 3 players
26/27 years old: 5
24/25 years old: 7
22/23 years old: 5
20/21 years old: 6

It’s interesting to note that Laver was 30 years of age when he began his second Grand Slam in 1969. Though I used to think so, I seriously doubt he would be that competitive at that age in today's game.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rafa's knees are another factor, of course, but the above suggests that his window for winning Slams isn't as big as some people think it is.


Last edited by kihei: 07-09-2012 at 07:26 AM.
kihei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 10:38 AM
  #511
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 500
You have to wonder how Agassi's career would have unfolded had he been into tennis early in his career. He could have had a lot more slams or the extra play could have caused more injuries later on and caused him to not get the 5 when he was older. Roger is in such good physical shape, likely due to his game being so perfect and without extra wear on his body.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 10:50 AM
  #512
kihei
Registered User
 
kihei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,799
vCash: 3202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
You have to wonder how Agassi's career would have unfolded had he been into tennis early in his career. He could have had a lot more slams or the extra play could have caused more injuries later on and caused him to not get the 5 when he was older. Roger is in such good physical shape, likely due to his game being so perfect and without extra wear on his body.
A lot of the players from the past have "ifs" attached, though. Borg, if he hadn't burned out at so early an age; Laver, if he hadn't been excluded from Grand Slams during some of his prime years. Same for Rosewall who was ineligible because of his professional status for most of his prime years. Tilden, if travel to Australia had been feasible in his day. I mean I even wonder what Nastase would have done if he had possessed, say, just a third of a brain.

kihei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:07 PM
  #513
Deficient Mode
Step with me
 
Deficient Mode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 42,314
vCash: 1271
Almost forgot about this:
Oxfam wins big with Federer victory
Quote:
Because of a bet made in 2003, the charity won $154,440 when Federer defeated Andy Murray in the Wimbledon final.

According to Oxfam, Nicholas Newlife bet that Federer would win seven Wimbledon titles before 2020. When Newlife died three years ago, he left his estate - including some outstanding bets - to the organisation.

Deficient Mode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 10:59 PM
  #514
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kihei View Post
22/23 years old: 5
20/21 years old: 6
How many players in that age range in today's top 30? 4 or 5?

Uncle Rotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2012, 02:22 AM
  #515
Deficient Mode
Step with me
 
Deficient Mode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 42,314
vCash: 1271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Rotter View Post
How many players in that age range in today's top 30? 4 or 5?
Del Potro, Cilic, Nishikori, Dolgopolov, and Raonic. Tomic was there until yesterday.

Deficient Mode is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.