Bull is the best ever. Never before & never again!!Quote:
Originally Posted by leosimha
Printable View
Bull is the best ever. Never before & never again!!Quote:
Originally Posted by leosimha
Great, so at the end of a career it would be who owned who is what will be remembered and not their overall achievements & how versatile they were...Excellent!!
Again for 1000th time, Fed's resume & owning by Nadal only says how good Fed was in Clay. Had he been a little weak on clay ( say like a Sampras) he wouldn't have met Nadal in those Clay matches (15 of their 31 meetings), the H2H would have looked much better, but actually would have meant Fed was not good in clay.
A 32nd ranked player way back when he was just 17 in 2004 won against the then No.1 player in their very first meeting (Miami Masters) on his least favourable surface (Hard court). So this guy clearly had something to unsettle the No.1 on his best surface. But somehow he avoids meeting the No.1 on any of the Hardcourt Grandslams until 2009, clearly when the other guy is on his decline. Remember by this time they have already met 19 times (10 times on clay, 4 on Hardcourts, 3 on Grass & 2 on indoor Hardcourts).
So much for the Strong era player being beaten by an outdated/injured/old Weak era player!!Quote:
Originally Posted by leosimha
"My point is, at least with Pete, he never allowed anyone to 'own' him during his playing career. Off course, in clay courts everyone owned him, but in Grass and Hard courts, he was close to unstoppable. Agassi, Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Rafter, et all all posed different threats (if you can include the likes of Chang/Courier w ho both were lighting quick from the baseline) and Sampras always had answers. "
That depends on what you mean by letting somebody owning him. People cite head to head to argue that Nadal owns Federer. By the same token, Sampras trailed Hewitt 4-5 and Kraijeck 4-6. So it's not true that he always beat all of his opponents on hard and grass court. There were some players who bothered him as well. But none of those players had the consistency to also win lots of slams, unlike Nadal. Speaking of which...
"I remember this match clearly, Pete thumped Hewitt in the semifinals and was swept away by Marat Safin in the Finals. This was 2000 US open. Yes. Exactly the reverse happened the next year. Sampras conquered Safin in the SF and subsequently lost in the finals to Hewitt.
But, the point i am trying to make is Pete Sampras taught Marat Safin a lesson or two about S&V in the SF of US Open 2001 and conquered his conquerer of last year with this trademark and delightful S&V. "
I remember both tournaments well because as a Sampras fan, I was upset to see him lose to these 'upstarts' after working hard to reach the final. So...I never said Safin or Hewitt owned Sampras. You seem to have jumped to that inference of your own. I don't think Hewitt or Safin can begin to approach one of the all time greats of the game that Sampras was. So the point, rather, was that the game had evolved. Even decent, talented players like Hewitt or Safin had begun to beat Sampras before all the fuss about slowing down the courts began. It's the racquets. And I want to bring in another late 90s player into the discussion that people forget about..as in, the full spectrum of his achievements. Gustavo Kuerten. Without ever winning a hard or grass court slam, Kuerten still finished 2000 as no.1. I think he was the first clay court specialist in years and years to achieve that. Borg or Lendl were always good on grass and hard court respectively. Kuerten beat both Agassi and Sampras in the year ending championships to achieve this feat. 2000 was a pretty seismic year in tennis but nobody really noticed because they couldn't think of any of these players as 'great' and therefore dismissed these feats as 'one offs'. Even I am wise only with hindsight. But in my defence I was just getting into junior college then and didn't really analyse tennis. :mrgreen:
"actually the reason why delpo lost is because of the surface being too slow and it suits hewitt who is a marathon player like nadal."
On the other hand, Delpo is a pretty good clay court player and it's Hewitt who loved playing on fast surfaces. He used to just wait for serve and volleyers to come in and pass them. He doesn't have big groundies unlike Delpo so the longer the rally the harder for him to win. But Delpo lacks patience and also doesn't move up and down the court much at all. Djoko lacks Delpo's physical attributes and yet he steps in a little inside the baseline to take the ball early. Delpo just hangs back and wants to fire winners from way behind. Doesn't always work. I for one am glad Hewitt won as is his game is more interesting and tactical and he relies on SHOTS rather than brutal physical power to win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Agree with more less everything you said here. It is just a bad match up for Fed. On the other hand, Nadal used to lose to players like Gonzalez or Youzhny until 2008 when not only Fed but all the earlier generation players began to go off their peak.
Omega Need your thoughts on this article.
http://www.tennispanorama.com/archives/20595Quote:
First, there are issues from a purely entertainment and traditional point of view. What makes tennis so unique is the variety of surfaces and the way in which the surfaces compare and contrast against each other. It forces players to come up with different game-plans on different surfaces against different players and means that total domination is next to impossible due to the rigors and difficulty of adapting to each and every surface. Even Federer at his very best was routinely beaten by many a player on his least favorite surface. And it comes as no surprise that Novak Djokovic’s spectacular year – arguably one of the best and most consistent seasons in history – has come in 2011 as most major surfaces have become almost identical.
But it is far from just an aesthetic and cosmetic problem. Traditionally, clay is by far the most grueling and toughest surface on the body, and the faster surfaces have always provided a heavy contrast to the red dirt – allowing players to shorten points, attack and somewhat protect and preserve the body. The slowing down of the courts has taken this away, with most courts coming glorified clay court. It means that players are having to put their bodies under immense pressure day in and day out and it’s leading to increasingly more injuries. Again, it’s no surprise that after a long and grueling season, this US Open broke the record for most withdrawals and retirements in a single tournament.
^^^ Incidentally since that article, ATP introduced a stricter time violation rule - you lose a point for taking more than 25 seconds between serves. That has probably already ensured we won't see a repeat of the gruelling 2012 AO final.
Surface Tension
How big a role has court technology played in tennis's current golden age?
By Brian Phillips- Grantland, June 27, 2013
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...age-men-tennis
Wondeful posts from Crimpson King and Omega. Keep it coming guys...
Meet your 2013 US Open Champion & the World No. 1 Rafael Nadal (come next Monday 09/09/13)..
Absolutely nothing can stop the Bull here on from clinching it.
The only slight threat that he might have had was in the 4th round against John Isner.
With him folding to Kohli yet again, its going to be a cake walk for the BULL...Way to go BULL!!
I remember reading this then. I for one completely agree with that article. Its pathetic how the current generation of players don't want to have any variety on the surfaces (including Federer). Fed. now & again talks about having few fast courts (he did speak about it in the WTF 2012). After seeing Cincinatti slowed down this year (Nadal claiming Cincinatti slower than Montreal was an absolute shock), there is only Dubai left for a little pacy hard court.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
Like the article mentions, it is quite funny how the players never talk about this while constantly complaining about the length of the season. I am sure if the entire ATP tour is played on Clay, Bull will have no issues to play all the events week in week out and none of his issues would ever surface. For him everything should be to his liking (venue can't be in an altitude, balls can't be lighter, surface can't be pacier, conditions cannot be ideal (indoor), balls have to bounce & the list goes on & on).
And for record all the issues that Nadal have is just because of his intense 3 month clay season, which he never realizes.
The only time I had a liking for Nadal's game was during the 2010 US Open when he really served well & attacked atleast the second serves. He quickly went back to his ever dependent defense style from 2011. Now he does look to finish points a little quicker, but have to see how he plays against the likes of Murray/Novak & even Ferrer..
The Federer- Nadal QF clash looks inevitable unless Federer folds earlier.
At Round 3:Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
J. Isner beaten by P. Kohlschreiber 4-6 6-3 5-7 6-7
Nadal defeated I. Dodig 6-4 6-3 6-3
A. Riske caused a big upset when she defeated former Wimbledon champion Petra Kvitová in the third round by 6-3 6-0
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Looks like the "setha paambu" is still breathing! Roger Federer beats 63rd ranked Adrian Mannarino 6-3, 6-0, 6-2 at the US Open. This has to be a conspiracy; they are keeping the "paambu" alive just to make sure Nadal gets his chance to "feast on his pigeon again" and to "boast up his meaningless H2H"!!Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Seeds tumbling in the women's draw (as usual) even as the men's draw is relatively business-as-usual. Lisicki, Wozniacki, Kuznetsova, Kvitova all knocked out...to add to Robson, Stosur and Errani. Radwanska, Li, Serena and Vika still going strong.
Yes, because "setha paambu" is never afraid to meet "nondi kaalai" even in his worst form...Quote:
Originally Posted by raagadevan
Its "nondi kaalai" who is more worried about the ever meaningful H2H...
Anyway "nondi kaalai" yet to bite another US Open trophy!! Congrats!!
Let us see who would upset Serena this time. Apart from her serves, Serina's double handed back-ends are so powerful and delight to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by crimson king
Even if he learns Tamil, I will say "Hey! you have a head count 21–3 against Federer, then how else should I call you?"Quote:
Originally Posted by VinodKumar's
Head 2 Head Count என்றால் இப்படி இருக்கணும்.
Sampras 20-14 Agassi
Sampras 12-7 Becker
Sampras 4-5 Hewitt
Sampras 12-6 Ivanisevic
Federer 16–13 Djoko
Federer 21-10 Nadal
Federer 9–11 Murray
Nadal 21-15 Djoko
Nadal 6-4 Hewitt
Nadal 18-13 Murray
Nadal 21 - 10 FedererQuote:
Originally Posted by venkkiram
Nadal 13 - 5 Murray
Sampras only H2H record against Federer is 0-1,
Year Tournament & City Surface Round Winner & Score 2001 Wimbledon
EnglandGrass R16 Federer, Roger
7-6(7), 5-7, 6-4, 6-7(2), 7-5
too bad on the part of wimbledon organizers to have slowed down the wimbledon grass surface from 2001 onwards which aided federer to win against Sampras, the fast grass court player.... :(
really amazed at the Sampras's H2H record against a marathon player like Hewitt.... :shock:
The way Andy Roddick played in the finals of Wimbledon 09, was anything but like a 'setha pambu'. Gave Federer a real scare and could have easily gone over the line to win his first Wimbledon title. Sometimes the overall scores never tell you the complete story. And one can argue saying it was a one off match. But it was the Wimbledon final and almost everybody thought the match was a foregone conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by venkkiram
Federer's H2H record against Nadal on Hard Courts is 6-7. :shock: The hard courts have slowed down since 2004 when Nadal met Federer for the first time and Nadal won against Federer. The ATP organizers are well against Federer and have aided Nadal.
Year Tournament & City Surface Round Winner & Score 2013 ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Cincinnati
OH, U.S.A.Hard Q Nadal, Rafael
5-7, 6-4, 6-3 Stats
2013 ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Indian Wells
CA, U.S.A.Hard Q Nadal, Rafael
6-4, 6-2 Stats
2012 ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Indian Wells
CA, U.S.A.Hard S Federer, Roger
6-3, 6-4 Stats2012 Australian Open
AustraliaHard S Nadal, Rafael
6-7(5), 6-2, 7-6(5), 6-4 Stats
2011 Barclays ATP World Tour Finals
Great BritainHard RR Federer, Roger
6-3, 6-0 Stats
2011 ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami
FL, U.S.A.Hard S Nadal, Rafael
6-3, 6-2 Stats2010 Barclays ATP World Tour Finals
London, EnglandHard F Federer, Roger
6-3, 3-6, 6-1 Stats
2009 Australian Open
AustraliaHard F Nadal, Rafael
7-5, 3-6, 7-6(3), 3-6, 6-2 Stats
2007 Tennis Masters Cup
ChinaHard S Federer, Roger
6-4, 6-1 Stats
2006 Tennis Masters Cup
ChinaHard S Federer, Roger
6-4, 7-5 Stats
2006 Dubai
U.A.E.Hard F Nadal, Rafael
2-6, 6-4, 6-4 Stats
2005 ATP Masters Series Miami
FL, U.S.A.Hard F Federer, Roger
2-6, 6-7(4), 7-6(5), 6-3, 6-1 Stats2004 ATP Masters Series Miami
FL, U.S.A.Hard R32 Nadal, Rafael
6-3, 6-3 Stats
Er...no, at the time of Miami 2004 Nadal was just an up and coming player while Fed was already a two time slam winner and being hailed as the next great by many former tennis players. Nadal didn't even get to no. 2 before July 2005, more than a year after their first meeting. It is just a bad match up for Fed. There is no need for conspiracy theories. ATP does not hate Federer. If they were so pro Nadal, they wouldn't have brought in point penalties for taking more than 25 seconds between serves, a rule that Nadal clearly hates.
For a great problem solver in Bull, it amazes me how he took more than 4 years since his first grand slam to reach his Hard Court slam Final.... Yeah ultimately he didn't solve anything, ATP solved it for him nicely.....
Since Bull won the Olympic, suddenly it became a must for every Professional to have it.
Since Bull have won multiple Davis Cups, it has become a must for every Professional to have it.
No one talks (all the bandwagoners) about WTF which is considered useless (what is it a "glorified meaningless exhibition").
Wait for suddenly the WTF to have its importance, when Bull wins it for the first time (Yeah the problem solver will ultimately solve it also)....
And how about speeding up the Clay for a change (when every other surface has gone in the opposite direction). It will be fun to see how Bull will react to it. I know it will never happen, but still they can do as anyway Fed is useless in all surfaces these days (pacy or bouncy)
:lol: :thumbsup:
WTF's are slow now as well. The one at shanghai was much quicker than the present o2 at london.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Perhaps you may not find it so amazing if you were reminded of the fact that Sampras did not reach a Wimbledon final until 93 (which he won), three years after his first Grand Slam title at US Open, give or take a couple of months.
FYI, RG already uses lighter balls since the last two years which has in fact sped up play considerably.Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Sampras was not a great problem solver you see....
When Sampras's own competitor Agassi won the Olympic Gold Medal, it was not seen as a missing piece in Sampras's resume.
Must be because both were Americans. Sampras inspite of not even reaching a single French Open Final he was considered the best just by him winning 14 GS titles. Little did these American clowns know that a Swiss Maestro will eat up all his records in no time......
Update on Indians at the US Open...
Doubles 3rd Round:
Sania Mirza & Zheng Jie defeat Anna-Lena Gronefeld & Kveta Peschke (6-2, 6-3)
Leander Paes & Radek Stepanek defeat Michael Llodra & Nicolas Mahut (7-5, 4-6, 6-3)
Rohan Bopanna & Edouard Roger-Vasselin defeated by Colin Fleming & Jonathan Marray (4-6, 4-6)
Rajeev Ram (Indo-American) & Brian Baker defeated by Jamie Murray & John Peers (7-8, 5-7, 6-7)
Serena Williams wins grudge mtch against Sloane Stephens 6-4 6-1. So far going strong!!
Er, by the same logic, then neither is Nadal for he took even longer to win a slam on hard court. And his first HC slam was Aus Open, which some clay court players have won in the past. e.g Carlos Moya.Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
You know I was just kidding. Anyway I can understand if it takes longer to win Wimbledon as we have only two tournaments in grass (one ATP 250 & one GS) which could be tough to get used to as they are quite rare. With more than 70% tournaments in the tour being played in Hard court it is quite extraordinary why a great problem solver like Bull took that long to figure out those....Quote:
Originally Posted by crimson king
Federer says he is up for challenge with Nadal. That's a good sign of confidence on the part of Federer.
Roger Federer to meet Tommy Roberdo tonight; rain permitting...
Roger Federer - Tommy Robredo
10 -H 2 H Wins- 0
31 -Age- 32
Basel, Switzerland -Birthplace- Hostalric, Spain
Bottmingen, Switzerland -Residence- San Cugat del Valles, Spain
6'1" (185 cm) -Height- 5'11" (180 cm)
187 lbs (85 kg) -Weight- 165 lbs (75 kg)
Right-handed -Plays- Right-handed
1998 -Turned Pro- 1998
32/11 -YTD Win/Loss- 32/17
1 -YTD Titles- 2
910/209 -Career Win/Loss- 453/287
77 -Career Titles- 12
$77,775,114 -Career Prize Money- $10,186,775
Just now started watching the match. Shocked to see that match already going strong. Robredo got the first set. Wishing Federer controls his emotions and get all the next 3 sets.
Federer's backhand is a problem. It was targetted specifically by Robredo in the early parts of the first set. Add the bad winning percentage of the second serve.He is hardly winning points on the second serve. Federer looking way below par here.
Federer shows trouble in managing his forehand errors.
Morethan his backend shots, today its the forehand that kills Federer. He lost an easy chance to convert Robredo's game.