New Balls #2003--2007#..how did 5-rivals become `ONE`?? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

New Balls #2003--2007#..how did 5-rivals become `ONE`??

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 04:39 AM
###
...
@ the end of 2003 there was relative parity @ the top of men`s tennis with 5 New Balls all being @ similiar points in their career:cool:


2003 Federer:
1-Slam, 11-titles

2003 Hewitt:
2-Slams, 19-titles

2003 Safin:
1-Slam, 11-titles

2003 Roddick:
1-Slam, 11-titles

2003 Ferrero:
1-Slam, 11-titles


###~~However 4 years later 4/5 New Balls careers have stalled, in particular JCF has won precisly nothing since 2003, meanwhile FED`s added 11-Slams & 40-titles:eek:

2007 Federer:
12-Slams, 51-titles

2007 Hewitt:
2-Slams, 27-titles

2007 Safin:
2-Slams, 15-titles

2007 Roddick:
1-Slams, 23-titles

2007 Ferrero:
1-Slams, 11-titles

....
~~So the question is this: could anyone foresee Federer`s utter domination over this 4 year period:confused:
How did FED improve so much:confused:
Why did the other New Balls fail to improve/get worse:confused:

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 06:23 AM
...
#FED since 2004: 11-Slams, 40-titles!

#SAFIN since 2004: 1-Slam, 4-titles.

#A.ROD since 2004: 12-titles

#HEWITT since 2004: 7-titles

#JCF since 2004: `zero`

BlueSwan
10-17-2007, 07:19 AM
Could anyone foresee Federer`s utter domination over this 4 year period?
No. Federer was always regarded as the prime talent of his generation, but he was also known for being unstable. A lot of people thought he would be #1 and win many slams, but I don't think anyone could have predicted this kind of domination. Generally, the consensus during 1998-2003 was that the men's game had gotten so deep, that complete domination would be impossible. It took a godlike player to prove that prediction wrong.

How did FED improve so much?
Godlike talent combined with the sudden control of his own mind, that he gained. There have been quite a few extremely gifted players, who didn't fulfill their promises due to their mind not being in its right place. Rios and Safin are prime examples of this. Federer combines the amazing talent of a Rios or McEnroe with the work ethic of a Llendl or Muster and the mental strength and focus a Sampras or Borg (well, perhaps not quite, but you get the idea).

Why did the other New Balls fail to improve/get worse?
JCF ran into injury hell. The rest of them took such a beating by Federer, that I think their downfall was more or less created by him. Had Federer not been in the mix, I think all of those players would have gone on to win several further slam titles.

RagingLamb
10-17-2007, 07:57 AM
it's truly an amazing accomplishment by Roger.

not sure where the others went wrong. it's too bad though.

Tabledott
10-17-2007, 08:02 AM
I believe Federer is too good. I mean he's so talented. They didn't do anything wrong.

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 08:37 AM
Could anyone foresee Federer`s utter domination over this 4 year period?
No. Federer was always regarded as the prime talent of his generation, but he was also known for being unstable. A lot of people thought he would be #1 and win many slams, but I don't think anyone could have predicted this kind of domination. Generally, the consensus during 1998-2003 was that the men's game had gotten so deep, that complete domination would be impossible. It took a godlike player to prove that prediction wrong.

How did FED improve so much?
Godlike talent combined with the sudden control of his own mind, that he gained. There have been quite a few extremely gifted players, who didn't fulfill their promises due to their mind not being in its right place. Rios and Safin are prime examples of this. Federer combines the amazing talent of a Rios or McEnroe with the work ethic of a Llendl or Muster and the mental strength and focus a Sampras or Borg (well, perhaps not quite, but you get the idea).

Why did the other New Balls fail to improve/get worse?
JCF ran into injury hell. The rest of them took such a beating by Federer, that I think their downfall was more or less created by him. Had Federer not been in the mix, I think all of those players would have gone on to win several further slam titles.


:wavey:
thanks for your thoughts:cool:
...
yeah i was one of those who thought the depth in men`s tennis would prevent Federesque domination from ever happening;)

especially considering Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero & Roddick were all young slam winners & @ around the same time as Federer won his 1st major->> just seemed highly unlikely that all of his rivals failed to maintain their momentum whilst Roger`s transformation into one of the most dominant sportsman ever took place:devil:

it`s still crazy to think that in the last 4-years the combined forces of Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick have only combined for one lone victory [Safin`s defeat over Roger @ AO 2005 SF]:eek:

i`d still like to see a renaissance from one of FED`s former rivals, but as the years pass by it`s becoming less & less likely that the other former New Balls will ever win another slam between them:sad:

leng jai
10-17-2007, 08:40 AM
So you're here to tell us that Federer's last 4 years have been quite good?

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 08:48 AM
So you're here to tell us that Federer's last 4 years have been quite good?


here to tell you that some of the younger members on MTF might not recall the era when 5 New Balls had relative parity =>> a mere 4-years ago;)

***
when JCF defeated FED @ the Madrid SFs in 2003 to briefly become #1, did anyone foresee that Roger would go on to win 11-Slams & 40-titles, whilst JCF would never win another title [in the ensuing 4-years]:eek: :confused: :confused:

Or Levy
10-17-2007, 08:57 AM
You dont' need to look far to find out what people thought about the "new balls" and the slam predictions for 2004 back in 2003, just go read that board from the start. I was curious enough to do that a few days ago.

It's great, people raving about Roddick and Ferrero.

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 09:01 AM
You dont' need to look far to find out what people thought about the "new balls" and the slam predictions for 2004 back in 2003, just go read that board from the start. I was curious enough to do that a few days ago.

It's great, people raving about Roddick and Ferrero.


:wavey:
cheers mate:cool:
~is that my old thread that you`re refering to:confused:

leng jai
10-17-2007, 09:25 AM
here to tell you that some of the younger members on MTF might not recall the era when 5 New Balls had relative parity =>> a mere 4-years ago;)

***
when JCF defeated FED @ the Madrid SFs in 2003 to briefly become #1, did anyone foresee that Roger would go on to win 11-Slams & 40-titles, whilst JCF would never win another title [in the ensuing 4-years]:eek: :confused: :confused:

Mate its a given that no one is going to predict success of this magnitude...

Johnny Groove
10-17-2007, 09:32 AM
Maybe in another 4 years, people will look back to 2007 and say: "Can you beleive Djokovic beat everyone in Madrid 07 and never won another title?!?!? And now Gasquet has 8 slams, Murray has 5?" etc.

Looking back is always fun :)

BlueSwan
10-17-2007, 09:37 AM
Probably a stupid question, but how does one find threads from previous years?

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 09:44 AM
Maybe in another 4 years, people will look back to 2007 and say: "Can you beleive Djokovic beat everyone in Madrid 07 and never won another title?!?!? And now Gasquet has 8 slams, Murray has 5?" etc.

Looking back is always fun :)


..:wavey:
interesting scenario/example you suggest;)
~~
however we both know that Gasquet & Murray will be extremely lucky to win one slam between them:p

Nole on the other hand will surely win one & probably 3-4;)

Puschkin
10-17-2007, 10:18 AM
.....however we both know that Gasquet & Murray will be extremely lucky to win one slam between them:p


Your knowledge is not worth much, as Roger shows. ;) :p

alelysafina
10-17-2007, 10:22 AM
here to tell you that some of the younger members on MTF might not recall the era when 5 New Balls had relative parity =>> a mere 4-years ago;)

***
when JCF defeated FED @ the Madrid SFs in 2003 to briefly become #1, did anyone foresee that Roger would go on to win 11-Slams & 40-titles, whilst JCF would never win another title [in the ensuing 4-years]:eek: :confused: :confused:

Ferrero is the most disappointing in my book (especially since he is the reason why I began to get in to tennis) I never in my wildest dreams thought that Federer would ever dominate the sport like he did or that Ferrero would not have another title by 2007. I always imagined that JCF would become somewhat Federer-esq (wait for it) and the King of Clay.

He had an amazing 2003 with wins on all surfaces and amazing slam result that included not only a Grand Slam Win and a Grand slam final on opposing surfaces but a quarterfinal at the AO and RD16 at Wimby, he won 30 matches on both hard court and clay and went on to win 2 AMS titles on different surfaces. I though this was it, he was going to begin showing a new level of tennis, and although he wasn't by any means going to be federer, he was going to be a more multi surface player and maybe win An AO or two, of course the FO and maybe a USO. I just don't know what happened.

buzz
10-17-2007, 10:27 AM
..:wavey:
interesting scenario/example you suggest;)
~~
however we both know that Gasquet & Murray will be extremely lucky to win one slam between them:p

Nole on the other hand will surely win one & probably 3-4;)

I don't get this... With Gasquet maybe, but I have no idea how good Murray wil get, He was improving very fast until he got injured. Maybe he overtakes nole just like fed overtook Hewitt, but then before Nole has won a slam. So how do you (think) to know this??

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 10:45 AM
I don't get this... With Gasquet maybe, but I have no idea how good Murray wil get, He was improving very fast until he got injured. Maybe he overtakes nole just like fed overtook Hewitt, but then before Nole has won a slam. So how do you (think) to know this??


:wavey:
okie dokes~ i may be wrong of course;)
...just watching Murray over the last couple of years, despite his improvements i don`t get the sense that he`s the real deal!
I can forsee Murray becoming a regular semifinalist & quaterfinalist @ slams, but i don`t think he has the killer instinct to finish off the job;)

*remember Murray`s never been beyond Rd.4 @ a slam, & he`s only got 2 MM titles to his name so far!

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 10:49 AM
Ferrero is the most disappointing in my book (especially since he is the reason why I began to get in to tennis) I never in my wildest dreams thought that Federer would ever dominate the sport like he did or that Ferrero would not have another title by 2007. I always imagined that JCF would become somewhat Federer-esq (wait for it) and the King of Clay.

He had an amazing 2003 with wins on all surfaces and amazing slam result that included not only a Grand Slam Win and a Grand slam final on opposing surfaces but a quarterfinal at the AO and RD16 at Wimby, he won 30 matches on both hard court and clay and went on to win 2 AMS titles on different surfaces. I though this was it, he was going to begin showing a new level of tennis, and although he wasn't by any means going to be federer, he was going to be a more multi surface player and maybe win An AO or two, of course the FO and maybe a USO. I just don't know what happened.


:wavey:
agree with you about JCF~~ he`s clearly the most disappoiting:sad:
>>> i just wonder if JCF had finished 2003 ranked #1 [he was awfully close] if his career would have taken a different course thereafter:confused:

2004 began badly for Ferrero, losing to Mr.Nobody Guccione @ Sydney [rd.1]:eek:
despite reaching AO SFs a few weeks later he was absolutely crushed by FED, & along with injury problems he was never the same man:sad:

Rogiman
10-17-2007, 11:17 AM
Why did the other New Balls fail to improve/get worse?
JCF ran into injury hell.That's the myth, but in reality he gave up after the first hurdle.

stebs
10-17-2007, 11:37 AM
Pre '04

Federer - Safin.....3-1
Federer - Roddick..5-1
Federer - Ferrero..3-3
Federer - Hewitt...2-7

Federer - Rivals......13-12

Post '04

Federer - Safin......5-1
Federer - Roddick..9-0
Federer - Ferrero...6-0
Federer - Hewitt...11-0

Federer - Rivals....31-1

Who knows what happened for that to take place, I guess a combination of factors. Federer got better at controlling his mind as well as his tennis getting better. Ferrero went into decline with injuries and confidence. Safin had injury problems and consistency problems. Roddick was just as good for some of the time but he just couldn't beat Federer and that translated into confidence problems. Hewitt became sidetracked but also Federer was just too good for him even when his mind was on the game. More top 20 depth meant he got hit off court by lower ranked players in 3 set matches especially as well.

That tennis kid
10-17-2007, 11:49 AM
:wavey:
okie dokes~ i may be wrong of course;)
...just watching Murray over the last couple of years, despite his improvements i don`t get the sense that he`s the real deal!
I can forsee Murray becoming a regular semifinalist & quaterfinalist @ slams, but i don`t think he has the killer instinct to finish off the job;)

*remember Murray`s never been beyond Rd.4 @ a slam, & he`s only got 2 MM titles to his name so far!

Federer wasn't exactly racking up the titles at Murray's age either. I'm not suggesting that Murray will achieve anything like Federer has, but it is a little premature to assign him a slamless career so soon. I would keep in mind that Murray has only played in eight Grand Slams so far, Djokovic twelve, Gasquet seventeen and Berdych seventeen. So it stands to reason his Slam record would be less impressive.

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 11:49 AM
Pre '04

Federer - Safin.....3-1
Federer - Roddick..5-1
Federer - Ferrero..3-3
Federer - Hewitt...2-7

Federer - Rivals......13-12

Post '04

Federer - Safin......5-1
Federer - Roddick..9-0
Federer - Ferrero...6-0
Federer - Hewitt...11-0

Federer - Rivals....31-1

Who knows what happened for that to take place, I guess a combination of factors. Federer got better at controlling his mind as well as his tennis getting better. Ferrero went into decline with injuries and confidence. Safin had injury problems and consistency problems. Roddick was just as good for some of the time but he just couldn't beat Federer and that translated into confidence problems. Hewitt became sidetracked but also Federer was just too good for him even when his mind was on the game. More top 20 depth meant he got hit off court by lower ranked players in 3 set matches especially as well.


:wavey:
Thanks for these stats:cool:
**good analysis;)

buzz
10-17-2007, 03:41 PM
:wavey:
okie dokes~ i may be wrong of course;)
...just watching Murray over the last couple of years, despite his improvements i don`t get the sense that he`s the real deal!
I can forsee Murray becoming a regular semifinalist & quaterfinalist @ slams, but i don`t think he has the killer instinct to finish off the job;)

*remember Murray`s never been beyond Rd.4 @ a slam, & he`s only got 2 MM titles to his name so far!

Well I am also far from certain he is going to win slams, but because you said (to blaze) 'we both know Murray and Gasquet will be extremely lucky to win one slam between them'. I don't think you can say that. The guy is only 20 (only 2 years in top 300 yet) and had to work a lot on physical strength in the past year....He did, we'll see if it pays off. He still strugles a bit with his mind, so there are things he can and maybe wil improve... And if he does it's no luck if he wins a couple slams.

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 10:51 PM
Well I am also far from certain he is going to win slams, but because you said (to blaze) 'we both know Murray and Gasquet will be extremely lucky to win one slam between them'. I don't think you can say that. The guy is only 20 (only 2 years in top 300 yet) and had to work a lot on physical strength in the past year....He did, we'll see if it pays off. He still strugles a bit with his mind, so there are things he can and maybe wil improve... And if he does it's no luck if he wins a couple slams.

:wavey:
as is said I may be wrong, but just stating my thougts;)
...
Murray is certainly a talent~~ no doubt about that:cool:
*however a few things are working against him in my opinion:
1.the pressure the British media puts on him may prevent him from reaching his potential!
2.the guy seems incredibly injury prone, everytime he seems to be making progress there`s another injury setback!
3.he seems like somewhat of a choker!
4.most top players have alteast reached a slam QF by the age of 20, Andy`s best is rd.4
5.attitude problems~~ hurling offensive language towards his coach, too much negativity evident!
6.despite an appealing game he lacks weapons to take out the top players & last 7 matches @ a slam

stebs
10-17-2007, 11:06 PM
1.the pressure the British media puts on him may prevent him from reaching his potential!
That will work against him but if he is good enough to win a slam it won't be a decisive factor.

2.the guy seems incredibly injury prone, everytime he seems to be making progress there`s another injury setback!
Yes, but we will have to see how much of an effect it has on his career.

3.he seems like somewhat of a choker!
He's very streaky which means he often wins from behind or loses from in front but he is not a choker. We went through this in another thread.

4.most top players have alteast reached a slam QF by the age of 20, Andy`s best is rd.4
He's lost to good players though and his best chances would've been AO, W and USO this year. AO he pushed rafa to five, not bad. Wimbledon he missed. USO he was in but recovering from injury. I am pretty sure he'd have a QF without the injury.

5.attitude problems~~ hurling offensive language towards his coach, too much negativity evident!

Fair enough.

6.despite an appealing game he lacks weapons to take out the top players & last 7 matches @ a slam

He's already proved he can hit Nadal off court for stretches, that he can put away a victory against Federer, that he can deal with big servers like Roddick , that he can out manouvre baseliners like Davydenko and that he can push away pushers like Canas.

He's beaten every type of player in the book or at least proved that he can. His serve is big and his BH is a very consistent point winning weapon.

What is the basis of this seemingly random claim? Do you just not like Murray?

Burrow
10-17-2007, 11:09 PM
Hewitt is above Safin on your list cause he won more titles, but 2007 Safin won more masters series titles than 2007 Hewitt, so Safin should be ahead, International Series count for next to nothing.

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 11:17 PM
Hewitt is above Safin on your list cause he won more titles, but 2007 Safin won more masters series titles than 2007 Hewitt, so Safin should be ahead, International Series count for next to nothing.

:wavey:
Hewitt`s got 2 TMC titles [Safin zero], which most would rank higher than Masters Series;)
Hewitt was year end back-to-back #1:cool:

CmonAussie
10-17-2007, 11:20 PM
What is the basis of this seemingly random claim? Do you just not like Murray?

:wavey:
I like Murray`s style of play, but I don`t like his attitude:eek:
Andy`s shot his mouth off too much in the media, saying a lot of stupid/thoughtless statements.
Also Murray seems to direct his anger towards those who are tying to help him, even McEnroe wouldn`t do that:devil:

stebs
10-17-2007, 11:22 PM
:wavey:
I like Murray`s style of play, but I don`t like his attitude:eek:
Andy`s shot his mouth off too much in the media, saying a lot of stupid/thoughtless statements.
Also Murray seems to direct his anger towards those who are tying to help him, even McEnroe wouldn`t do that:devil:

You'll see in my reply to you I said 'fair enough' to that point.

It was the other five that didn't make sense to me.

CmonAussie
10-18-2007, 06:31 AM
You'll see in my reply to you I said 'fair enough' to that point.

It was the other five that didn't make sense to me.

:angel: peace stebs:cool:
...
well lets predict Murray`s future;)
in my opinion i foresee Andy doing the following:
*winning 2-4 Masters Series
*making SF runs @ AO, Wimby & USO
*ranking peak in the top-5 for a couple of years
*winning 14-18 titles

in other words Murray will have a career similar to Enquist, Rusedski, Henman, Philippoussis or Rios:devil:
~~~
so please tell me your prediction:confused:

buzz
10-18-2007, 08:04 AM
I would say, Murray could very well get a career something like Hewitt or Safin. But it depends on how long Federer keeps his domination. If the fed guy keeps doing crazy with 3slams a year for the next couple of years it might be very difficult for Murray. I don't think he will get more than 3 because if he wants to win one he has to be injury free for a period and mental stabel...

To stebs, yes he has done well against almost any type of player. I hope he will win some matches against Djokovic (0-3 currently)

Rogiman
10-18-2007, 08:10 AM
I would say, Murray could very well get a career something like Hewitt or Safin. I don't think he will get more than 3
You're talking like people are buy Slams at the supermarket next to their building.

3 is out of question, and no, I don't think he'll have back to back #1 finishes.

CmonAussie
10-18-2007, 08:20 AM
You're talking like people are buy Slams at the supermarket next to their building.

3 is out of question, and no, I don't think he'll have back to back #1 finishes.


:cool:
good points;)
...
many MTF posters like to point out how young Murray is [21yrs in May].
but Andy`s not that young relatively: Nadal, Djokovic, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero.. etc. all had far superior records @ the same age;)

of course there are relative late bloomers like FED, but we all know Roger is a godlike talent:angel: >> & there`s no point comparing others to Federer because a guy like him comes along once or twice a century!!

buzz
10-18-2007, 09:01 AM
Yes that are all good points, lol @ the supermarkt thing!

It's just a wild guess I think...:) but why not. Two slams are in my opinion just as likely as 1 or as likely as 0, It depends a lot on the rest of the field wich depends on....

CmonAussie
10-18-2007, 09:42 AM
Yes that are all good points, lol @ the supermarkt thing!

It's just a wild guess I think...:) but why not. Two slams are in my opinion just as likely as 1 or as likely as 0, It depends a lot on the rest of the field wich depends on....

:wavey:
i can see either Murray or Gasquet picking up a slam somewhere along the way [the draw opens up, FED loses early etc.]~~ but not both of them;)

so yes, it`s entirely possible that Murray will collect a slam [but not more than one]:cool:

World Beater
10-19-2007, 05:21 AM
You're talking like people are buy Slams at the supermarket next to their building.

3 is out of question, and no, I don't think he'll have back to back #1 finishes.

you dont think he could win 3 slams?i'm not saying its likely but i would say its a fair estimate. i wouldnt be surprised to see murray win 3 slams.

lets say the guy is healthy. With his tennis talent + small improvement + experience, you dont think he could win 3 slams over the course of his career?unless federer starts to cheat father time, there are a lot of slams up for grabs. djokovic and nadal are not winning everything. i dont see another nadal yet or a steadily improving younger djokovic in the next generation who will then take the mantle. Even if there is, there is always a transition period for which murray can play a huge part in. We can already see signs that though there are players like young, gulbis, korolev, cilic, I'm not sure they are the next gen of dominating players. i will confess i havent seen much of them but i have heard scouting reports.

i'm thinking about murray in the context of his competition, and then compare his talent to those of years past. He is more talented imo than courier and kafelnikov on HC and grass. i think back to back #1 finishes will be a tougher task than winning 3 slams over the course of a career. That is something nadal, djokovic and murray may never do.

Monteque
10-19-2007, 06:07 AM
Pre '04

Federer - Safin.....3-1
Federer - Roddick..5-1
Federer - Ferrero..3-3
Federer - Hewitt...2-7

Federer - Rivals......13-12

Post '04

Federer - Safin......5-1
Federer - Roddick..9-0
Federer - Ferrero...6-0
Federer - Hewitt...11-0

Federer - Rivals....31-1



even Federer yet to be a God-mode player, he still ahead one match comparing that 4 players. :rolleyes:

Poor Hewitt, 2-7 to 11-0. It's like Fed kept the revenge for years before he makes Hewitt his slave forever. Sadist!!