Blake or Fish? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Blake or Fish?

Voo de Mar
08-22-2010, 01:37 AM
Blake or Fish: who has had a better career by far? Pretty comparable careers, Blake is almost two years older but in terms of pro-experience 1 year older.

James Blake

Singles

10 titles, 14 finals

Best results in Grand Slam tournaments:
Australian Open (quarterfinalist 2008)
US Open (quarterfinalist 2005-06)

Best results in "Masters Series" tournaments:
Indian Wells (finalist 2006)
Cincinnati (finalist 2007)

Other big results:
Masters (finalist 2006)
Olympics (semifinalist 2008)

Doubles

5 titles, 2 finals

Best results in Grand Slam tournaments:
Australian Open (quarterfinalist 2005)
Wimbledon (semifinalist 2009)

Mardy Fish

Singles

5 titles, 12 finals

Best results in Grand Slam tournaments:
Australian Open (quarterfinalist 2007)
US Open (quarterfinalist 2008)

Best results in "Masters Series" tournaments:
Indian Wells (finalist 2008)
Cincinnati (finalist 2003 & 2010)

Other big results:
Olympics (finalist 2004)

Doubles

8 titles, 1 finals

Best results in Grand Slam tournaments:
Australian Open (quarterfinalist 2005 & 2009)
Wimbledon (semifinalist 2009)

Certinfy
08-22-2010, 01:39 AM
That's incredibly close, I think I'm going to have to wait until tomorrow to answer though, if Fish wins I'll go with him, if he doesn't then I'll go with Blake.

Serenidad
08-22-2010, 01:40 AM
Blake, which is sad for Fish.

samanosuke
08-22-2010, 01:42 AM
For now Blake , from tomorrow it could be Fish

Haelfix
08-22-2010, 01:43 AM
Obviously Blake by a long shot. He was top 10 in the world for a long time, and always underperformed relative to his true value.

Further he always had the kind of x factor where he was capable of taking down a big shot player like Rafa or Agassi and indeed he did.

He was too streaky to ever win anything, but he was also the type of player you definitely didn't want to see show up in your draw.

dombrfc
08-22-2010, 01:45 AM
Blake, regardless of tomorrow.

Helevorn
08-22-2010, 01:47 AM
For now Blake , from tomorrow it could be Fish

*

Blake's gonna lose till he retires, Fish's gonna win for one or two years

GugaF1
08-22-2010, 01:48 AM
not so close

James Blake

Singles

10 titles, 14 finals


Mardy Fish

5 titles, 11 finals.

That pretty much says it. That, and on top the career best ranking Blake being top 4 and Fish top 17.


Blake from 2005-2008 was clearly the second American with great consistency and many times overlaping Roddick for some amount of time as the n.1 American around 2006-07. No other American has really being close to doing that. He was considered a top player for years.

Also, from 2000-2003 he was on of the best potential prospects from the U.S having close matches with many top players (Hewitt/ Federer) and being a dangerous top 20 already. He only went away from the radar a few years a few years around 2003-2005

Fish hasn`t quite mount that consistency and I am not sure has really being considered a top notch player for a considerable amount of time. At best he can be considered a very good top 20 player at the US HC season.


I don`t think their career is quite comparable yet. Maybe if Fish reach his peak now much later on his career.

MacTheKnife
08-22-2010, 01:54 AM
Blake. But if Fish keeps playing like this that will change.

emotion
08-22-2010, 01:57 AM
Blake unless Fish wins TM

Voo de Mar
08-22-2010, 01:57 AM
not so close

James Blake

Singles

10 titles, 14 finals


Mardy Fish

5 titles, 11 finals.


But there's a question, whether won/lost finals are the best criterion to value tennis players? I'm not saying Fish has had better career than Blake but it's worth discussing. My first thought to compare retired Frenchmen:

Forget: 11 titles, 8 finals
Pioline: 5 titles, 12 finals

Grand Slam:
Forget never passed quarterfinal (5 times there)
Pioline: finalist at the US Open and Wimbledon, 4 other quarterfinals

It's a matter of quantity and quality, what's more important for us...

GugaF1
08-22-2010, 02:00 AM
True Voo, but in my view Blake is clearly. superior to Fish n both quantity and quality. That could get really closer if Fish has the peak of his career from now on.

The number that is quite important as well is career ranking.

Ivo#1Fan
08-22-2010, 02:02 AM
If Fish keeps it up though, he's could end up ahead of Blake. For now though Blake's consistent run in the top 10 puts him ahead. Fish is definitely surprising me lately. I actually hope he beats Federer tomorrow. It would be sort of interesting then with some expectations for Fish in the US Open. A few weeks ago it was looking like Isner and Querrey were going to take over as the only hopes for US tennis future.

Of course if Ivo goes ahead and takes US citizenship then he will be the hope of the future :)

Voo de Mar
08-22-2010, 02:06 AM
The number that is quite important as well is career ranking.

It's important but when we concentrate on their best achievements we have only GS quarterfinals in both cases, Blake has played 3 big finals, Fish one final more. Blake was humiliated in each of his big finals, Fish had match points to get his first Masters Series title, led two-sets-to-one in the Olympic final.

Looking at the numbers logically, Blake has had a better career so far, but the general impression (at least for me) is that Fish isn't far behind, obviously tomorrows final would improve this general impression.

MacTheKnife
08-22-2010, 02:14 AM
If fish wins tomorrow he'd move ahead of blake in my mind. Blake has those DC matches too that mean a lot both in terms of his career and his popularity.

Voo de Mar
08-22-2010, 02:18 AM
If fish wins tomorrow he'd move ahead of blake in my mind. Blake has those DC matches too that mean a lot both in terms of his career and his popularity.

Blake is lucky with Davis Cup title under his belt. In that year when USA won Davis Cup he lost important rubbers in the 1st round and semifinal. Fish also played in the Davis Cup final but in much more disadvantageous conditions for the Americans, on clay-court in Spain whilst when USA beat Russia in the final with Blake it happened in Portland.

Sapeod
08-22-2010, 03:47 AM
Despite the difference in titles and highest rankings, Fish is the much better player and will undoubtedly end with a better career than Blake.

Fedex
08-22-2010, 04:19 AM
Right now it's definitely Blake. Blake's finished in the top 8 on a couple of occasions and he even reached a TMC final. Fish hasn't done anything like that yet.

coonster14
08-22-2010, 04:37 AM
Blake for now.

Filo V.
08-22-2010, 04:41 AM
The answer is Blake. It's not really debatable. We can discuss stats all we like, and the stats are similar, but in terms of a general feeling of what's what and whose been a real force at the top of the game consistently, it's James.

Roddickominator
08-22-2010, 04:53 AM
I much prefer Fish, but James has had a better career up to this point.

heya
08-22-2010, 04:56 AM
They're glad they're not a confused shitjob like Roddick.

Pea
08-22-2010, 05:07 AM
Silver medal > anything flake has accomplished

jcempire
08-22-2010, 05:43 AM
Blake has been No 4 in the world and pretty close to No 3 and ATP Master CUP Final ........

Fish still has a way to go.

The Freak
08-22-2010, 05:52 AM
Yeah, Blake got to number 4 in the world. That far surpasses Mardy.

n8
08-22-2010, 06:10 AM
Definitely Blake. Take their prize money for instance. Blake is just shy of $7million ($6.95million) while Fish 'only' has $4.33million (not including Cincinnati).

HKz
08-22-2010, 06:15 AM
Blake for sure, but of course neither career has ended.

James has had one more QF at the Grand Slams, and of course made the TMC final and has been a year end top 10 player. Mardy's only thing over Blake is that he has reached one more MS final than James.

Plus, James has defeated Nadal a couple times, and if I'm not mistaken, a better record against top 10 players.

I'm not going to vote though because this is such a premature thread. Anything can still happen even though they are both pretty old in tennis years.

Purple Rainbow
08-22-2010, 07:40 AM
This shouldn't even be up for debate.
Up to now, Blake has had the superior career. By far.

FlameOn
08-22-2010, 09:16 AM
Blake.

Goldenoldie
08-22-2010, 12:31 PM
Blake. The rankings don't lie and it's not even close. However Blake is now sliding down and Fish is definitely going up, so in a year or two there could be a different answer.

timafi
08-22-2010, 01:22 PM
they both are hard court specialist punks but since one is "better" than the other;there isn't much to go about really but Blake has won more tier 3 titles;"won" a Davis Cup thanks to Roddick and made a few MS finals;off course only on hard course

none of the idiots have made even 1 slam semis:tape: :tape:

disguntingly I'm going Blake:tape:

peribsen
08-22-2010, 03:36 PM
James Blake
10 titles, 14 finals

Best results in Grand Slam tournaments:
Australian Open (quarterfinalist 2008)
US Open (quarterfinalist 2005-06)

Best results in "Masters Series" tournaments:
Indian Wells (finalist 2006)
Cincinnati (finalist 2007)

Other big results:
Masters (finalist 2006)
Olympics (semifinalist 2008)

Mardy Fish
5 titles, 11 finals

Best results in Grand Slam tournaments:
Australian Open (quarterfinalist 2007)
US Open (quarterfinalist 2008)

Best results in "Masters Series" tournaments:
Indian Wells (finalist 2008)
Cincinnati (finalist 2003 & 2010)

Other big results:
Olympics (finalist 2004)


I had never looked up the records of most US players. After reading this post I've also searched ATP for the results of Isner and Querrey.

I'm surprised at just how relatively paltry their records are, with the sole exception of Roddick. I mean, I know these guys are mostly hardcourters, but just because of that I had imagined they had much better track records on HC.

Everybody knows that in Spain we have many claycourters, who achieve next to nothing outside red earth. But at least there are always a few of them around who actually win big things on clay. Bruguera, Costa, Mantilla, Ferrero... those guys won or reached finals in FO or clay MS1000, hell they were really among the very best on clay of their generations.

I mean, these guys are esentially hardcourters, yet their records on HC are not particularly better than Ferrer's or Verdasco's (both have made SF/QF in AO and USO, Picks was RU on YEC), worse than JC Ferrero's (F in USo and SF in AO) and in another category altogether to Nadal's (AO win, Olympic gold, 9 HC MS1000finals of which won 5).

I hadn't realized till now the depth of USA tennis decline. OK, go for hardcourt specialists, but at least have them achieve on HC results that are similar to the ones our much maligned claycourters are capable of delivering on clay.

straitup
08-22-2010, 03:55 PM
peribsen, I agree with you except Ferrer, Ferrero, and Nadal are far ahead of Blake and Fish in accomplishments to me. Blake in particular has been an underachiever when it comes to slams, never losing a ton in the early rounds when he was top 10 but not really going super deep either.

born_on_clay
08-22-2010, 08:34 PM
Blake without a doubt

Voo de Mar
08-13-2011, 09:40 PM
Fish chases Blake in terms of career achievements. With the current form (and Blake's decline), Fish has really good outlook to be a better American player from the perspective of the future after their retirements.

guga2120
08-13-2011, 09:43 PM
Fish chases Blake in terms of career achievements. With the current form (and Blake's decline), Fish has really good outlook to be a better American player from the perspective of the future after their retirements.

If he wins Canada he would pass him. Too bad for him Novak is playing.

jcempire
08-13-2011, 09:59 PM
For now Blake , from tomorrow it could be Fish

No way


Blake has been No 4 and Master Cup Final
bad luck because he face Roger Federer 5 times a year in 2006 where he could draw a lot better .. that would make he Top three in 2006. maybe better.

Fish never been Top 5 and Never play Master cup

jcempire
08-14-2011, 04:25 AM
so Blake still a lot better than Fish

Peak Blake > Peak Fish

Caesar1844
08-14-2011, 04:35 AM
Silver medal > anything flake has accomplished
The TMC is far more important than the Olympics. Seems to me Blake isn't getting enough recognition for that achievement in this thread.

Fish is a journeyman, Blake was a contender.

jcempire
08-14-2011, 04:42 AM
The TMC is far more important than the Olympics. Seems to me Blake isn't getting enough recognition for that achievement in this thread.

Fish is a journeyman, Blake was a contender.

completely agree with you

2006 Blake would easily beat 2011 Fish 6-3 6-2...

Nole Rules
08-14-2011, 04:45 AM
Peak Blake >>>>>> 2011 Fish.

alfonsojose
08-14-2011, 04:45 AM
Fish

jcempire
08-14-2011, 04:47 AM
and we all know only guy who owns 2006 Blake is.... 2006 Roger Federer ....