Who do you think is/was more talented than Federer? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Who do you think is/was more talented than Federer?

Pages : [1] 2

paseo
05-22-2011, 01:50 AM
The French Open is hours away, and you guys will definitely talk about it. But let me squeeze one more thread that's not related to it for your trolling discussing pleasure :D

Federer was hailed by most to be the most talented tennis player ever. Some said that he might not be the best ever, but still the most talented. I do love the Federer game. It's beautiful yet effective. I understand that it takes supreme talent to be able to execute it consistently like Fed did.

When asked "who's the most talented ever?" I would say Federer without thinking for another second. But when I did think for another second, I thought maybe my liking the Federer game made my view on the subject a bit limited. Shortly, maybe I'm biased.

Okay, maybe you guys are biased too :D, but I still want to hear your opinions. Who do you regard is/was more talented than Federer?

Laver? McEnroe? Edberg? Sampras? Rios? Safin? Nalbandian? Nadal? or maybe Djokovic? Who????

Topspindoctor
05-22-2011, 01:52 AM
Almagro for sure. The guy was holding back his entire career because he doesn't like to be in the spotlight.

Ibracadabra
05-22-2011, 02:06 AM
Brad gilbert.

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 02:10 AM
Brad gilbert.

Graet sense of humour:) Alas, onto the subject at hand, I know I've only seen him on highlights bu Mceenroe was more gifted than nalbondian an safin and not far behind federer.

tests
05-22-2011, 02:26 AM
Mcenroe was more talented when it came to volleying and "touch" but his ground game was abysmal.

IMO, i think players that had supreme talent (Safin, nalbandian, maybe a few others) were not TOO far off from federer, talent wise.

What sepearated fed from these other guys is hard-work, and injury free career, incredibly endurance/stamina (which i think guys like safin could have had), and confidence.

tests
05-22-2011, 02:29 AM
Graet sense of humour:) Alas, onto the subject at hand, I know I've only seen him on highlights bu Mceenroe was more gifted than nalbondian an safin and not far behind federer.


i dunno, mcenroe was incredibly gifted, but his ground-game was his weakness. For federer, to some extent, his backhand was a weakness, but this was mostly only exploited by nadal in feds prime.

Safin had no weaknesses, while nalby had his serve

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 02:35 AM
I just thing mcenroe offered smoething different. The angles, the spins. I don't believe him to be the combination of power and touch of Federer of course.

tests
05-22-2011, 02:39 AM
I just thing mcenroe offered smoething different. The angles, the spins. I don't believe him to be the combination of power and touch of Federer of course.


i agree.

I honestly do not think nadal is THAT talented. He is more of a physical specimen, and really hard worker. Obviously he has talent... but he does not ooze talent like a federer and to a lesser extent safin/nalby

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 02:48 AM
True. Nadal, i suppose is the modern athletic player. Maybe perhaps I judge Mcenroe on the lightning quick grass of 1980s highlights too much. However if we look at his performance in US open semis against Connors in 84, could Nadal overcome that. Mcenroes half volleys (the most difficult shot in tennis) in that match were jaw dropping. In my opinion modern Nadal would not win a set against that kind of tennis. Federer would struggle but would win over 5 sets, probably in 4.

yesh222
05-22-2011, 03:18 AM
I would say McEnroe. Maybe Sampras too, but that's very close. We should be more clear here, by the way. There is a very big difference between pure talent and how it is utilized. If we talk pure talent I think we could come up with dozens better than Federer. Federer is certainly not the fastest, the best mover, the best server, and doesn't have the biggest shot. It's how Federer uses his talents perfectly that has always made him so great.

tests
05-22-2011, 03:53 AM
I would say McEnroe. Maybe Sampras too, but that's very close. We should be more clear here, by the way. There is a very big difference between pure talent and how it is utilized. If we talk pure talent I think we could come up with dozens better than Federer. Federer is certainly not the fastest, the best mover, the best server, and doesn't have the biggest shot. It's how Federer uses his talents perfectly that has always made him so great.


we ar etalking about PURE talent here... not how it was/is utilized

Pirata.
05-22-2011, 04:07 AM
Verdasco.

tests
05-22-2011, 04:09 AM
Verdasco.

:o

MayerFan
05-22-2011, 04:09 AM
Dodig.

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 04:35 AM
I like Verdasco but like a lot of mugs he hasn't really put the effort in down the years. I'm no fan of Murray but he certainly cares about tennis.

tests
05-22-2011, 04:41 AM
I like Verdasco but like a lot of mugs he hasn't really put the effort in down the years. I'm no fan of Murray but he certainly cares about tennis.

so you think verdasco is really talented?

yesh222
05-22-2011, 04:49 AM
we ar etalking about PURE talent here... not how it was/is utilized

That makes it a little silly. There are plenty of incredibly talented players out there who never fully utilize it. A guy like Dudi Sela has one of the purest shots I've ever seen and the best-disguised backhand drop shot in the game. His movement needs work and he is too short to be too effective. Or a guy like Lleyton Hewitt is one of the most talented out there but just never had the size to have enough power. There are so many "talented" players out there if all we care about is pure talent it's silly. There is so much more to tennis than talent alone.

tests
05-22-2011, 05:14 AM
That makes it a little silly. There are plenty of incredibly talented players out there who never fully utilize it. A guy like Dudi Sela has one of the purest shots I've ever seen and the best-disguised backhand drop shot in the game. His movement needs work and he is too short to be too effective. Or a guy like Lleyton Hewitt is one of the most talented out there but just never had the size to have enough power. There are so many "talented" players out there if all we care about is pure talent it's silly. There is so much more to tennis than talent alone.


Lets put it this way:

Which guys are as talented or more talented than fed... and they have actually shown periods where the talent they possess was on display (safin at 2005 aus open... nalby during his wins against fed/nadal)

Basically, guys that were EXTREMELY talented (on par with fed, or close to him)... but were not able to display that talent consistently (if that makes sense)

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 05:21 AM
so you think verdasco is really talented?

Not really talented. He could have done more in terms of reaching quarter finals but a bit of a non-entity really.

sco
05-22-2011, 05:24 AM
No one. IMO - Federer was as perfect a tennis player as there could be. He was not the best at any one thing, but his combination of power, speed, touch/feel and strokes made for the most dominant peak and longest stretch of consistent brilliance. The one thing I feel he was not top-notch at (compared to other greats) was mental toughness, but if he had that with his talent, he's never lose. He's a natural and his classic game has allowed him to have a long, relatively injury-free stay at/near the top.

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 05:27 AM
That makes it a little silly. There are plenty of incredibly talented players out there who never fully utilize it. A guy like Dudi Sela has one of the purest shots I've ever seen and the best-disguised backhand drop shot in the game. His movement needs work and he is too short to be too effective. Or a guy like Lleyton Hewitt is one of the most talented out there but just never had the size to have enough power. There are so many "talented" players out there if all we care about is pure talent it's silly. There is so much more to tennis than talent alone.

You mention Lleyton Hewitt but i don't see any special shot to be honest in the clips i've seen of Hewitt. Sorry I really don't. Shear forcefullness of effort I think in his case. quite boring

tests
05-22-2011, 05:31 AM
No one. IMO - Federer was as perfect a tennis player as there could be. He was not the best at any one thing, but his combination of power, speed, touch/feel and strokes made for the most dominant peak and longest stretch of consistent brilliance. The one thing I feel he was not top-notch at (compared to other greats) was mental toughness, but if he had that with his talent, he's never lose. He's a natural and his classic game has allowed him to have a long, relatively injury-free stay at/near the top.


good points

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 05:42 AM
No one. IMO - Federer was as perfect a tennis player as there could be. He was not the best at any one thing, but his combination of power, speed, touch/feel and strokes made for the most dominant peak and longest stretch of consistent brilliance. The one thing I feel he was not top-notch at (compared to other greats) was mental toughness, but if he had that with his talent, he's never lose. He's a natural and his classic game has allowed him to have a long, relatively injury-free stay at/near the top.

This is a wonderful speech and you know what, I really feel there is at least a couple more of the major tournaments left in Federer's locker. I'm utterly convinced he will win at least one of Wimbledon or US open this year

careergrandslam
05-22-2011, 05:49 AM
i dont like federer but i highly respect the dude's talents and achievements.

in terms of pure natural talent, the guy is a freak of nature, i doubt u will ever get another player with MORE talent than federer. maybe someone in the next few decades might equal his talent, but not surpass him.

in terms of numbers, his records can be broken and there might be debate for who is the GOAT, but in terms of talent, federer was the GOAT in 2005.

i dont like him as a person due to his extraordinary arrogance, but u gotta respect his abilities, because it takes a special human being to do the things he does.

im a rafa fan, but rafa is not even in federer's league in terms of talent and rafa will be the first guy to admit it.

what i will always remember is when federer developed his drop shot, he never used to play that shot in the past but the second he started to do it, he became the best at the drop shot immediately. That showed how talented he was. he is a beautiful player to watch, easy on the eye.

but i support rafa because, rafa is a guy that is getting the absolute maximum out of his talent through sheer hard work and dedication. its his incredible determination that i love.
he knows he is not as talented as federer, but that doesnt stop him from competing with federer. he works 10 times as hard to achieve the same result as federer, and for me thats very inspirational.

i live by rafas philosophy everyday. that is that hard work, determination and dedication can allow any human being to be the best no matter if u are outclassed in talent. that u dont have to be given the gift of talent by god to be someone in this world, u can be successful through hard work and determination with ur goals in life.

that is inspirational.

tests
05-22-2011, 05:50 AM
i dont like federer but i highly respect the dude's talents and achievements.

in terms of pure natural talent, the guy is a freak of nature, i doubt u will ever get another player with MORE talent than federer. maybe someone in the next few decades might equal his talent, but not surpass him.

in terms of numbers, his records can be broken and there might be debate for who is the GOAT, but in terms of talent, federer was the GOAT in 2005.

i dont like him as a person due to his extraordinary arrogance, but u gotta respect his abilities, because it takes a special human being to do the things he does.

im a rafa fan, but rafa is not even in federer's league in terms of talent and rafa will be the first guy to admit it.

what i will always remember is when federer developed his drop shot, he never used to play that shot in the past but the second he started to do it, he became the best at the drop shot immediately. he is a beautiful player to watch, easy on the eye.

but i support rafa because, rafa is a guy that is getting the absolute maximum out of his talent through sheer hard work and dedication. its his incredible determination that i love.
he knows he is not as talented as federer, but that doesnt stop him from competing with federer. he works 10 times as hard to achieve the same result as federer, and for me thats very inspirational.

i live by rafas philosophy everyday. that is that hard work, dtermination and dedication can allow any human being to be the best no matter if u are outclassed in talent. that u dont have to be given the gift of talent by god to be someone in this world, u can be successful through hard work and determination with ur goals in life.

that is inspirational.


career, how do yo think guys like safin and nalbandian compare to federer... talent wise

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 05:54 AM
i dont like federer but i highly respect the dude's talents and achievements.

in terms of pure natural talent, the guy is a freak of nature, i doubt u will ever get another player with MORE talent than federer. maybe someone in the next few decades might equal his talent, but not surpass him.

in terms of numbers, his records can be broken and there might be debate for who is the GOAT, but in terms of talent, federer was the GOAT in 2005.

i dont like him as a person due to his extraordinary arrogance, but u gotta respect his abilities, because it takes a special human being to do the things he does.

im a rafa fan, but rafa is not even in federer's league in terms of talent and rafa will be the first guy to admit it.

what i will always remember is when federer developed his drop shot, he never used to play that shot in the past but the second he started to do it, he became the best at the drop shot immediately. That showed how talented he was. he is a beautiful player to watch, easy on the eye.

but i support rafa because, rafa is a guy that is getting the absolute maximum out of his talent through sheer hard work and dedication. its his incredible determination that i love.
he knows he is not as talented as federer, but that doesnt stop him from competing with federer. he works 10 times as hard to achieve the same result as federer, and for me thats very inspirational.

i live by rafas philosophy everyday. that is that hard work, dtermination and dedication can allow any human being to be the best no matter if u are outclassed in talent. that u dont have to be given the gift of talent by god to be someone in this world, u can be successful through hard work and determination with ur goals in life.

that is inspirational.

You're speech is inspirational. i really do believe we will see federer versus Nadal in Wimbledon final again this year. Lets hope the wimbledon organisors make the right decision

tyruk14
05-22-2011, 08:31 AM
Federer was mentally tough?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_e0K7Ti4Pz30/SlO1pliNpmI/AAAAAAAAANc/_TDaz0lUgVA/s400/Federer_Crying.JPG

Li Ching Yuen
05-22-2011, 08:50 AM
Your mom.

Commander Data
05-22-2011, 09:36 AM
Myla Rose Federer.

paseo
05-22-2011, 10:11 AM
No one. IMO - Federer was as perfect a tennis player as there could be. He was not the best at any one thing, but his combination of power, speed, touch/feel and strokes made for the most dominant peak and longest stretch of consistent brilliance. The one thing I feel he was not top-notch at (compared to other greats) was mental toughness, but if he had that with his talent, he's never lose. He's a natural and his classic game has allowed him to have a long, relatively injury-free stay at/near the top.

i dont like federer but i highly respect the dude's talents and achievements.

in terms of pure natural talent, the guy is a freak of nature, i doubt u will ever get another player with MORE talent than federer. maybe someone in the next few decades might equal his talent, but not surpass him.

in terms of numbers, his records can be broken and there might be debate for who is the GOAT, but in terms of talent, federer was the GOAT in 2005.

i dont like him as a person due to his extraordinary arrogance, but u gotta respect his abilities, because it takes a special human being to do the things he does.

im a rafa fan, but rafa is not even in federer's league in terms of talent and rafa will be the first guy to admit it.

what i will always remember is when federer developed his drop shot, he never used to play that shot in the past but the second he started to do it, he became the best at the drop shot immediately. That showed how talented he was. he is a beautiful player to watch, easy on the eye.

but i support rafa because, rafa is a guy that is getting the absolute maximum out of his talent through sheer hard work and dedication. its his incredible determination that i love.
he knows he is not as talented as federer, but that doesnt stop him from competing with federer. he works 10 times as hard to achieve the same result as federer, and for me thats very inspirational.

i live by rafas philosophy everyday. that is that hard work, determination and dedication can allow any human being to be the best no matter if u are outclassed in talent. that u dont have to be given the gift of talent by god to be someone in this world, u can be successful through hard work and determination with ur goals in life.

that is inspirational.

Good posts.

career, how do yo think guys like safin and nalbandian compare to federer... talent wise

Obviously I'm not careergrandslam :D, but let me respond. I think talent-wise Safin & Nalbandian are in the same league as Fed. But while Fed is at the top of the league, they're only about mid-table.

Graet sense of humour:) Alas, onto the subject at hand, I know I've only seen him on highlights bu Mceenroe was more gifted than nalbondian an safin and not far behind federer.

So in your opinion, there's no one that's even equal to Fed in terms of talent?

nole_no1
05-22-2011, 10:15 AM
Robredo...not

Nole :D

helvet empire
05-22-2011, 10:47 AM
nobody is even close.

BlueSwan
05-22-2011, 10:55 AM
nobody is even close.
QTF.

ssin
05-22-2011, 11:03 AM
I would have to agree that Federer is the most talented player ever.

Ukyo
05-22-2011, 11:07 AM
Cilic.

velikikomsa@gmai
05-22-2011, 11:52 AM
It's easy.... That would be Djokovic for sure.

Orka_n
05-22-2011, 12:22 PM
O. Hernandez. Behold.

NJKNN3XFJUA

zoparrat
05-22-2011, 12:49 PM
I'd say Marcelo Rios's talent was on par with Federer's. Mansour Bahrami's was probably even greater :)

LawrenceOfTennis
05-22-2011, 01:15 PM
Nalbandian. I would say Safin too, but I know Fed has always had more variety, smarter game. But after Federer, Del Potro has the biggest potential in the last 3 years. Without injuries, he would be no1. without any doubt.

MacTheKnife
05-22-2011, 02:24 PM
McEnroe.

Roadmap
05-22-2011, 02:47 PM
Good posts.



Obviously I'm not careergrandslam :D, but let me respond. I think talent-wise Safin & Nalbandian are in the same league as Fed. But while Fed is at the top of the league, they're only about mid-table.



So in your opinion, there's no one that's even equal to Fed in terms of talent?

I think there are players that matched him for touch. mcenroe and perhaps Nalbandian. Let me qualify this by saying Mcenroe was much smarter player than Nalbandian. However the reason federer is the greatest is no other player has combined power, touch and shot placement like has. Federer's serve is also very underrated in my opinion. I believe it to be one of the greatest and most varied serve's ever when on.

Sophocles
05-22-2011, 03:24 PM
Nobody stands out as more talented, but there are several players in the game's history who are on a par: McEnroe, Nastase, Hoad, Laver. You could also make a case for Rosewall, Agassi, Budge, Gonzales, Sampras, & Rios. By the way, Mac's ground game was far from abysmal: he had superb passing shots and could produce wondrously subtle variations in spin, pace, angle, & trajectory in his rally strokes. Borg was asked who had the best groundstrokes in tennis in 1981 and he replied McEnroe. His ground game looks tamer than anything you see today because he was playing with a wooden racquet.

Say Hey Kid
05-22-2011, 03:39 PM
No one. Nalbandian comes close. Del Potro is up there as well, imo.

I'm surprised Delpo's name doesn't get brought up more when it comes to natural talent.

r3d_d3v1l_
05-22-2011, 04:03 PM
He81C9YjNJk

And with a wooden racket. But Federer is still the most talented player ever.

Young 8
05-22-2011, 04:04 PM
Di Mauro

sexybeast
05-22-2011, 04:39 PM
It is difficult to compare, but both Laver and Mcenroe had better touch than Federer, both also had worse footwork which is talent aswell, Federer must have the best footwork of all time if you consider he is not very fast at all. Federer never fully developped his netgame, he had alot of potential and still today I think he could learn to volley like a beast in only 1 year of full dedication to the serve and volley art. Someone mentioned he went from never attempting the dropshot to have the best dropshot in the tour, the same goes for his volleys. Federer seriously needs to learn to halfvolley to begin with, but there is absolutely no reason why someone with his body coordination, reflexes, touch and athletism couldnt learn these skills.

Johnny Groove
05-22-2011, 04:41 PM
Safin had two weaknesses.

His head and his head.

sexybeast
05-22-2011, 04:44 PM
Safin had two weaknesses.

His head and his head.

How about his hearth? He didnt love tennis, didnt even like it.

Sophocles
05-22-2011, 04:46 PM
It is difficult to compare, but both Laver and Mcenroe had better touch than Federer, both also had worse footwork which is talent aswell, Federer must have the best footwork of all time if you consider he is not very fast at all. Federer never fully developped his netgame, he had alot of potential and still today I think he could learn to volley like a beast in only 1 year of full dedication to the serve and volley art. Someone mentioned he went from never attempting the dropshot to have the best dropshot in the tour, the same goes for his volleys. Federer seriously needs to learn to halfvolley to begin with, but there is absolutely no reason why someone with his body coordination, reflexes, touch and athletism couldnt learn these skills.

Laver had great footwork & McEnroe's is underrated, but I agree. Federer is or was brilliant at improvised half-volleys from the baseline. His net game peaked in 2003.

sexybeast
05-22-2011, 05:01 PM
Laver had great footwork & McEnroe's is underrated, but I agree. Federer is or was brilliant at improvised half-volleys from the baseline. His net game peaked in 2003.

Laver had great footwork and Mcenroe's was also very good, but Federer has the greatest footwork of all time, atleast had until 2008.

Federer's halfvolleys from the baseline really is something out of the ordinary, squash shots that really no other player I have ever seen has been able to produce. However his halfvolleys close to the net are not topnotch, nowhere close to Laver and Mcenroe ofcourse.

Nadull_tard
05-22-2011, 05:34 PM
Federer is above everyone in talent measure, because Roger was a complete player in all parts of the tennis craft, he was sublime from footwork to serve.

barahmasa
05-22-2011, 05:51 PM
It's easy.... That would be Djokovic for sure.

Haha, dream on. Looks like you don't know what talent means... :wavey:

Fujee
05-22-2011, 06:18 PM
rogers speed is vastly underrated

DrJules
05-22-2011, 07:33 PM
McEnroe.

BodyServe
05-22-2011, 07:49 PM
Safin had two weaknesses.

His head and his head.

No i think his prestige was appropriate to his game :D

Ukyo
05-22-2011, 07:54 PM
Haha, dream on. Looks like you don't know what talent means... :wavey:Thats why its good that youre here to explain what talent means.

Sunset of Age
05-22-2011, 07:57 PM
Like many have said already: Johnny Mac. :worship:
Oh, and I'd like to think Edberg too, but perhaps I can't be all too objective about him as he used to be one of my first tennis loves.

EDIT: I only mentioned the players I actually have seen playing in their prime.

Vida
05-22-2011, 08:21 PM
laver?

I mean Fed is very talented but with the BH... who knows? too many shanks, awkward net approaches and mishits, it does make Fed less all-around than the old guy.

Howard
05-23-2011, 12:15 AM
I know this is way before the time of most people here, but check out some videos of Nastase and you’ll see some tremendous talent (albeit much of it wasted.)

Ibracadabra
05-23-2011, 12:19 AM
Nobody overall but if you break it into sectors thats a different equation.

Topspindoctor
05-23-2011, 02:15 AM
Federer is above everyone in talent measure, because Roger was a complete player in all parts of the tennis craft, he was sublime from footwork to serve.

Lol. Fedtard clown had spoken.

Haelfix
05-23-2011, 02:21 AM
Sampras or Safin are probably the only two that get close in terms of raw talent. I'd like to include McEnroe and/or Laver and some of the old players, but the game really is quite different.

abraxas21
05-23-2011, 02:24 AM
in the last 10 years? nobody. from before? well, marcelo rios is probly the most naturally talented player ive ever seen play but i am not sure if he holds the comparison with federer. i didn't watch tennis before him so i can't talk with certainty about mcenroe, connors, laver and the likes.

abraxas21
05-23-2011, 02:26 AM
Sampras or Safin are probably the only two that get close in terms of raw talent. I'd like to include McEnroe and/or Laver and some of the old players, but the game really is quite different.

nah, sampras is certainly worse than federer talentwise. at the net a comparison can be made in favour of sampras, though.

safin was a ballbasher. his lack of variety is big when compared to federer.

JediFed
05-23-2011, 05:40 AM
No mention of the magician? Santoro. :D

Action Jackson
05-23-2011, 06:05 AM
Mecir and Ibracadabra is right

sco
05-23-2011, 06:36 AM
Federer's halfvolleys from the baseline really is something out of the ordinary, squash shots that really no other player I have ever seen has been able to produce. However his halfvolleys close to the net are not topnotch, nowhere close to Laver and Mcenroe ofcourse.

Federer is a natural - evidenced by these half-volleys from the baseline. Some of the shots he made that were instinctive and had to be improvised were just jaw-dropping. He didn't develop his drop shot until he started to lose his edge at the top - imagine all those years he scoffed at it (I guess thinking it was so sissy) he could have opened up the court even more but he didn't need the drop shot at his peak.

I also think that his net game is underdeveloped because of the slow surfaces and if the grass had stayed fast at Wimbledon, he would have rivaled McEnroe at the net. He seemed like a better volleyer in his 5 set match against Sampras than he does now (but that could be because of the strings, racquet technology and slower surfaces).

tests
05-23-2011, 07:31 AM
nah, sampras is certainly worse than federer talentwise. at the net a comparison can be made in favour of sampras, though.

safin was a ballbasher. his lack of variety is big when compared to federer.

safin was definitely not a ballbasher...

Anyone who has seen him in his heyday could attest that safin had a surprisingly natural touch at the net,and used great angles with his backhand. His forehand, however, could have been much improved iMHO

ssin
05-23-2011, 08:13 AM
Federer is a natural - evidenced by these half-volleys from the baseline. Some of the shots he made that were instinctive and had to be improvised were just jaw-dropping. He didn't develop his drop shot until he started to lose his edge at the top - imagine all those years he scoffed at it (I guess thinking it was so sissy) he could have opened up the court even more but he didn't need the drop shot at his peak.

I also think that his net game is underdeveloped because of the slow surfaces and if the grass had stayed fast at Wimbledon, he would have rivaled McEnroe at the net. He seemed like a better volleyer in his 5 set match against Sampras than he does now (but that could be because of the strings, racquet technology and slower surfaces).

very good post, true. Federer has fantastic touch and space awareness, he truly plays in 3D, and he would be an awesome volleyer with his panther movement and angles, without any doubt.

Just yesterday I watched some of those unbelievable shots, he is a freak. You cannot plan in advance something like that.

His only significant weakness comes from the very fact that he has his own trademark and natural game. He is readable and reluctant to adapt to some other styles and players. Even stubborn sometimes.

As a player he is still almost perfect. His personality is something that I could never really like, though, but I have huge respect for him.

wee
05-23-2011, 08:53 AM
Verdasco.

paseo
05-23-2011, 09:43 AM
I'd say Marcelo Rios's talent was on par with Federer's. Mansour Bahrami's was probably even greater :)

Rios game was beautiful indeed. I even switched to a 2-Handed BH for a while just so I can try those jumping ones :D I think Fed is more talented than Rios, but I definitely understand why you think they're equal. Bahrami is an entertainer, I don't know what to say about him.

McEnroe.

McEnroe.

Like many have said already: Johnny Mac. :worship:
Oh, and I'd like to think Edberg too, but perhaps I can't be all too objective about him as he used to be one of my first tennis loves.

EDIT: I only mentioned the players I actually have seen playing in their prime.

Nobody stands out as more talented, but there are several players in the game's history who are on a par: McEnroe, Nastase, Hoad, Laver. You could also make a case for Rosewall, Agassi, Budge, Gonzales, Sampras, & Rios. By the way, Mac's ground game was far from abysmal: he had superb passing shots and could produce wondrously subtle variations in spin, pace, angle, & trajectory in his rally strokes. Borg was asked who had the best groundstrokes in tennis in 1981 and he replied McEnroe. His ground game looks tamer than anything you see today because he was playing with a wooden racquet.

Yes. This McEnroe was good. Maybe he is more talented than Fed.

laver?

I mean Fed is very talented but with the BH... who knows? too many shanks, awkward net approaches and mishits, it does make Fed less all-around than the old guy.

I have to take your word on Laver, cause I only watched a few highlights of his matches. But those CYGSs do indicate a supreme talent.

I know this is way before the time of most people here, but check out some videos of Nastase and you’ll see some tremendous talent (albeit much of it wasted.)

I must see more of this Nastase.

No mention of the magician? Santoro. :D

I can't agree with this. Can you tell me your reason?

Nobody overall but if you break it into sectors thats a different equation.

Mecir and Ibracadabra is right

Good point.

Djokovic

It's easy.... That would be Djokovic for sure.

Djokovic lacks variety in his game. I don't think he's even on par with Fed in terms of talent, let alone better. But, everyone has their own opinion, I suppose.

atennisfan
05-23-2011, 12:17 PM
In modern era, no one else is as talented as Federer, if we are talking complete talent.

Judging by his mighty records, Laver might have been as talented, but I've never seen him playing a complete match.

LEO_Legionario
05-23-2011, 02:37 PM
Very dificult!!!
Maybe Rios, Nalbandian, Safin, Santoro, Gaudio........

Howard
05-23-2011, 02:51 PM
Oh, and I'd like to think Edberg too, but perhaps I can't be all too objective about him as he used to be one of my first tennis loves.Mine too, but in a manly, non-sexual way.

NadalPhan
05-23-2011, 02:51 PM
Safin was more talented. Too bad, dude looked like he didn't even care about tennis. Oh what a career and legacy he could have had...

Haelfix
05-23-2011, 02:59 PM
nah, sampras is certainly worse than federer talentwise. at the net a comparison can be made in favour of sampras, though.

safin was a ballbasher. his lack of variety is big when compared to federer.

Its pretty close. Sampras had a better serve (both 1st and 2nd), moved better at the net and had a better running forehand. Fed is faster, has a better return (during his peak) and has a much better backhand, and overall a better forehand.

Safin moved less well than Federer (even though it was a lot closer when Safin was young) and had a worse return game, but he had a better driving backhand and effortless power off both wings. I definitely disagree about the lack of variety. Safin was excellent at the net, had great feel, and his slice was pretty good (although far from Sampras or Federer level).

Both are very much all court players with a ton of variety, touch as well as the physical attributes (strength, size, speed, etc).

tests
05-24-2011, 12:36 AM
Its pretty close. Sampras had a better serve (both 1st and 2nd), moved better at the net and had a better running forehand. Fed is faster, has a better return (during his peak) and has a much better backhand, and overall a better forehand.

Safin moved less well than Federer (even though it was a lot closer when Safin was young) and had a worse return game, but he had a better driving backhand and effortless power off both wings. I definitely disagree about the lack of variety. Safin was excellent at the net, had great feel, and his slice was pretty good (although far from Sampras or Federer level).

Both are very much all court players with a ton of variety, touch as well as the physical attributes (strength, size, speed, etc).


whose closer to fed, talent wise. Safin or sampras

Haelfix
05-24-2011, 02:18 AM
Its hard to say exactly b/c so much of the things that made Sampras one of the greatest players in the world was not just in his strokes, but up there in his head. Ditto for Federer. Safin meanwhile could never quite exorcise those demons, barring the 2 slam finals where for whatever reason he zoned out completely and managed to get out of his own way.

But I mean talent is a bit of a weird word in tennis. Consider a player like Gilles Simon. There is not a single element of his game that you could point too and say, thats a dominating element that he does better than anyone else (hell not even top 10 really). However the guy is a top 10 player in the world, and has beaten all the best. Why? B/c he knows how to play tennis, his point construction, tactics, heart and mental all combine too make him more than the sum of his parts. Like that with a lot of great players, including slam winners.

So is it talent to know how to play the points, which shot to take at the right moment? Some might say so. Well if you do, then Sampras was the greater talent. If you don't, and only was going on what you might find in a videogame, then I'd probably (just barely) take a young Safin as he really didn't have a single weakness anywhere in his game.

tests
05-24-2011, 02:40 AM
Its hard to say exactly b/c so much of the things that made Sampras one of the greatest players in the world was not just in his strokes, but up there in his head. Ditto for Federer. Safin meanwhile could never quite exorcise those demons, barring the 2 slam finals where for whatever reason he zoned out completely and managed to get out of his own way.

But I mean talent is a bit of a weird word in tennis. Consider a player like Gilles Simon. There is not a single element of his game that you could point too and say, thats a dominating element that he does better than anyone else (hell not even top 10 really). However the guy is a top 10 player in the world, and has beaten all the best. Why? B/c he knows how to play tennis, his point construction, tactics, heart and mental all combine too make him more than the sum of his parts. Like that with a lot of great players, including slam winners.

So is it talent to know how to play the points, which shot to take at the right moment? Some might say so. Well if you do, then Sampras was the greater talent. If you don't, and only was going on what you might find in a videogame, then I'd probably (just barely) take a young Safin as he really didn't have a single weakness anywhere in his game.


how young of a safin are we talking about (2005 safin) or pre 2005

tests
05-24-2011, 02:42 AM
Its hard to say exactly b/c so much of the things that made Sampras one of the greatest players in the world was not just in his strokes, but up there in his head. Ditto for Federer. Safin meanwhile could never quite exorcise those demons, barring the 2 slam finals where for whatever reason he zoned out completely and managed to get out of his own way.

But I mean talent is a bit of a weird word in tennis. Consider a player like Gilles Simon. There is not a single element of his game that you could point too and say, thats a dominating element that he does better than anyone else (hell not even top 10 really). However the guy is a top 10 player in the world, and has beaten all the best. Why? B/c he knows how to play tennis, his point construction, tactics, heart and mental all combine too make him more than the sum of his parts. Like that with a lot of great players, including slam winners.

So is it talent to know how to play the points, which shot to take at the right moment? Some might say so. Well if you do, then Sampras was the greater talent. If you don't, and only was going on what you might find in a videogame, then I'd probably (just barely) take a young Safin as he really didn't have a single weakness anywhere in his game.


and i completely agree with what you are saying regarding the simon comment

stewietennis
05-24-2011, 02:58 AM
How do you differentiate between skill and talent?

If we saw these players as kids and gave them a racket, we can probably see how talented they are pre-tennis-education. However, because we see them in their prime, after they've developed skills in tennis academies and with coaches - how much of what you see on court would you attribute to skill as opposed to raw talent?

abraxas21
05-24-2011, 03:05 AM
Its pretty close. Sampras had a better serve (both 1st and 2nd), moved better at the net and had a better running forehand. Fed is faster, has a better return (during his peak) and has a much better backhand, and overall a better forehand.

Safin moved less well than Federer (even though it was a lot closer when Safin was young) and had a worse return game, but he had a better driving backhand and effortless power off both wings. I definitely disagree about the lack of variety. Safin was excellent at the net, had great feel, and his slice was pretty good (although far from Sampras or Federer level).

Both are very much all court players with a ton of variety, touch as well as the physical attributes (strength, size, speed, etc).

i agree with this

then again, i didn't say safin didn't have variety, i just said his variety was fairly limited compared to federer's. i regret saying he was a ballbasher, though. it's just that i like picking safin fans for some reason.

paseo
05-24-2011, 03:44 AM
Its hard to say exactly b/c so much of the things that made Sampras one of the greatest players in the world was not just in his strokes, but up there in his head. Ditto for Federer. Safin meanwhile could never quite exorcise those demons, barring the 2 slam finals where for whatever reason he zoned out completely and managed to get out of his own way.

But I mean talent is a bit of a weird word in tennis. Consider a player like Gilles Simon. There is not a single element of his game that you could point too and say, thats a dominating element that he does better than anyone else (hell not even top 10 really). However the guy is a top 10 player in the world, and has beaten all the best. Why? B/c he knows how to play tennis, his point construction, tactics, heart and mental all combine too make him more than the sum of his parts. Like that with a lot of great players, including slam winners.

So is it talent to know how to play the points, which shot to take at the right moment? Some might say so. Well if you do, then Sampras was the greater talent. If you don't, and only was going on what you might find in a videogame, then I'd probably (just barely) take a young Safin as he really didn't have a single weakness anywhere in his game.

I don't think it is. I would call it Tennis Intelligence, not tennis talent. It has more to do with comprehension of tactics.

Look at Fed, for instance. Sometimes he just look so dim on the tactics department. He kept trying shots and plays that are obviously not working. People might say "What the hell is he doing?", but no one is questioning his talent.

tests
05-24-2011, 04:31 AM
Safin was more talented. Too bad, dude looked like he didn't even care about tennis. Oh what a career and legacy he could have had...


what makes you say he was more talented than fed?

tests
05-24-2011, 04:37 AM
i agree with this

then again, i didn't say safin didn't have variety, i just said his variety was fairly limited compared to federer's. i regret saying he was a ballbasher, though. it's just that i like picking safin fans for some reason.


hehe.

Would you say sampras/safin are similar talent wise?

tests
05-24-2011, 04:37 AM
How do you differentiate between skill and talent?

If we saw these players as kids and gave them a racket, we can probably see how talented they are pre-tennis-education. However, because we see them in their prime, after they've developed skills in tennis academies and with coaches - how much of what you see on court would you attribute to skill as opposed to raw talent?


thats true.

tests
05-24-2011, 04:38 AM
I don't think it is. I would call it Tennis Intelligence, not tennis talent. It has more to do with comprehension of tactics.

Look at Fed, for instance. Sometimes he just look so dim on the tactics department. He kept trying shots and plays that are obviously not working. People might say "What the hell is he doing?", but no one is questioning his talent.


Yep. I feel the same way about federer sometimes. It seems that he lacks high tennis IQ at times... and it could be because his immense talent makes up for it.

2003
05-24-2011, 05:19 AM
Why so little love for Agg?

Gotta be talented to win a slam when your 35 going on 50

Navratil
05-24-2011, 06:40 AM
Not even Sampras I think.

But Navratilova of course :D

atennisfan
05-24-2011, 06:40 AM
Why so little love for Agg?

Gotta be talented to win a slam when your 35 going on 50

Not if you're juiced up from crystal meth

dombrfc
05-24-2011, 10:16 AM
Peak Rajeev Ram

yuri27
05-24-2011, 10:49 AM
Monfils

:haha::haha::haha::haha:

Sophocles
05-24-2011, 11:08 AM
Not if you're juiced up from crystal meth

Much more so, actually. Have you ever tried engaging in physical activity after months of heavy meth use?

Clydey
05-24-2011, 11:10 AM
Xristos.

Lana87
05-24-2011, 11:20 AM
Monfils

He could fall into category of the biggest waste of talent on tour.

Nole fan
05-24-2011, 11:26 AM
Djokovic is way more talented than Federer. What a question.

nalbyfan
05-24-2011, 11:43 AM
Nalby
Safin
Gasquet
Sampras
Big Mac
and many others probably

Forehander
05-24-2011, 02:18 PM
Sampras not up there? Joking right? The guy was a fking beast... a combination of unmatched power physically and mentally... Not just on a tennis court, if the days go back to swords and shields he would whopped everybody's ass in a fight. Fk if there was anybody I don't want to start a fight with ever it'd be Pete Sampras alright... If you bring him to this modern era he would still be kicking ass big time on the tennis court with modern techniques. He is one hell of a unique specimen Pete Sampras. His talent is way up there with Federer or anybody else named but in a very different way.

Anyway still I like Federer I'm biased so yeah Federer is the most talented of all time along with Sebastien Grosjean.

tests
05-24-2011, 10:41 PM
Sampras not up there? Joking right? The guy was a fking beast... a combination of unmatched power physically and mentally... Not just on a tennis court, if the days go back to swords and shields he would whopped everybody's ass in a fight. Fk if there was anybody I don't want to start a fight with ever it'd be Pete Sampras alright... If you bring him to this modern era he would still be kicking ass big time on the tennis court with modern techniques. He is one hell of a unique specimen Pete Sampras. His talent is way up there with Federer or anybody else named but in a very different way.

Anyway still I like Federer I'm biased so yeah Federer is the most talented of all time along with Sebastien Grosjean.


yea sampras was a beast.

What do you think about safin and nalby?

Roadmap
05-24-2011, 11:06 PM
Sampras did have wonderful agility at the net. The best first AND second serve ever. Wonderful mental strengh. I actually think on the old grass at Wimbie and also the US open hards then any version of Nadal aka Nadull aka moonballer would not have won a set (against Sampras) if they played all day long. Of course Sampras would not have won a set aginst 2008 Nadull on clay if they played for a decade

tests
05-24-2011, 11:21 PM
Only in your gloryhunting dreams.

yea, djokovic > fed talent wise?

yea right

Roadmap
05-24-2011, 11:34 PM
djokovic telegraphs his shots. there is no disguise. Good player though

Nole fan
05-24-2011, 11:39 PM
yea, djokovic > fed talent wise?

yea right

Aren't we entitled to our opinions? :rolleyes:

tests
05-25-2011, 01:09 AM
djokovic telegraphs his shots. there is no disguise. Good player though

no need for disguise when you are beasting everyone! hehehe

tests
05-25-2011, 01:09 AM
Aren't we entitled to our opinions? :rolleyes:


you are indeed right. If you feel that way, than that is of course your opinion.

Kudos

barahmasa
05-25-2011, 01:21 AM
Nalby
Safin
Gasquet
Sampras
Big Mac
and many others probably

Yeah sure, especially Gasquet, that forehand of his is just pure talent... :rolleyes:

tests
05-25-2011, 01:40 AM
Yeah sure, especially Gasquet, that forehand of his is just pure talent... :rolleyes:


yea i dunt think gasquet belongs in that class of talent..

Forehander
05-25-2011, 08:40 AM
yea sampras was a beast.

What do you think about safin and nalby?

They are both super talents. Just judging by their flowing techniques, clearly both of them are the type of geniuses that can pick up a racquet and play really well right from the start.

I play tennis myself. I dunno what type of player I am but I hate playing players like Safin and Nalbandian because they just make the game look so easy. It's extremely frustrating when you see how easy it is across the court for them to generate a shot that you would consider risky. Players like them can take down your confidence easily making you go for more and more just to keep up with them. You have to be extremely focused on your own game in order to pull through. I've obviously never played somebody with a feel like Federer afterall he's one in a hundred years type genius (for fksake the guy look almost like he play on instinct sometimes) but I can only assume i'd be like "what the fuck just happened lol?" if I play and lose. I've also never played somebody that's even CLOSE to the feel of Pete Sampras but they'd be the type I'm least willing to face because they are the born warrior type... they just have this natural intimidating presence that makes them so scary.

tests
05-25-2011, 09:52 AM
They are both super talents. Just judging by their flowing techniques, clearly both of them are the type of geniuses that can pick up a racquet and play really well right from the start.

I play tennis myself. I dunno what type of player I am but I hate playing players like Safin and Nalbandian because they just make the game look so easy. It's extremely frustrating when you see how easy it is across the court for them to generate a shot that you would consider risky. Players like them can take down your confidence easily making you go for more and more just to keep up with them. You have to be extremely focused on your own game in order to pull through. I've obviously never played somebody with a feel like Federer afterall he's one in a hundred years type genius (for fksake the guy look almost like he play on instinct sometimes) but I can only assume i'd be like "what the fuck just happened lol?" if I play and lose. I've also never played somebody that's even CLOSE to the feel of Pete Sampras but they'd be the type I'm least willing to face because they are the born warrior type... they just have this natural intimidating presence that makes them so scary.


yea i play tennis too, and seeing someone like safin or nalby or fed, who make the game look so fucking easy, across the net would be intimidating. You would have to play "out" of your comfort zone. On the other hand, playing someone like nadal would infuriate me because he gets everything back and he would ass-**** my onehanded backhand

Lopez
05-25-2011, 12:17 PM
Djokovic is way more talented than Federer. What a question.

Wow.

Just... wow.

ciprianned
05-25-2011, 01:55 PM
Marcel Granollers and Maximo Gonzalez :o

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
05-25-2011, 04:13 PM
no one is ever close

mcenroes backhand was the most hideous shot to watch i have ever seen

he was never in position, it looked weak and overall just a terrible shot

the only player who i can think of who had it all (literally) was safin

safin could even be a mental giant sometimes

shame he didnt even realise 50% of his potential

Raiden
05-25-2011, 05:08 PM
Del Potro has the kind of ball touch and position-awareness that virtually no other ATP top dog currently on the tour has. Add lethal power to that cocktail and the competition is rendered lifeless.

From the past: Fabrice Santoro. He was called The Magician exactly because of that thing we call "talent".

rocketassist
05-25-2011, 05:08 PM
Del Potro is not 'talented', he's a robotic factory produced drone. A good one I might add, but talent and him do not go together.

Sapeod
05-25-2011, 05:09 PM
Aren't we entitled to our opinions? :rolleyes:
That's not an opinion. Saying Djokovic is more talented than Federer is too foolish to be called an opinion.

Orka_n
05-25-2011, 05:13 PM
Del Potro has the kind of ball touch and position-awareness that virtually no other ATP top dog currently on the tour has.:haha: Give me a break.
From the past: Fabrice Santoro. He was called The Magician exactly because of that thing we call "talent".Just being good at making unorthodox shots is not the definition of tennis talent.

sco
05-25-2011, 05:30 PM
Del Potro has the kind of ball touch and position-awareness that virtually no other ATP top dog currently on the tour has. Add lethal power to that cocktail and the competition is rendered lifeless.

From the past: Fabrice Santoro. He was called The Magician exactly because of that thing we call "talent".
You must be kidding. Del Potro is a 6'5 version of the typical ball-bashing WTA player. I miss Justine.

Sophocles
05-25-2011, 05:35 PM
mcenroes backhand was the most hideous shot to watch i have ever seen

he was never in position, it looked weak and overall just a terrible shot

McEnroe had an awkward-looking unorthodox technique but his backhand was a great shot. He killed players with his passing shots off that wing and had one of the best slices in the history of the sport. His forehand was the weaker wing: he could do amazing things with it but it was liable to breaking down, particularly later in his career.

Action Jackson
05-25-2011, 05:36 PM
Del Potro has the kind of ball touch and position-awareness that virtually no other ATP top dog currently on the tour has. Add lethal power to that cocktail and the competition is rendered lifeless.

Stop going to coffee shops. del Potro = ballbasher.

rocketassist
05-25-2011, 05:39 PM
Methinks Nina had too much San Miguel before posting in this one. ;) :lol:

Sapeod
05-25-2011, 05:55 PM
:haha: Give me a break.
Just being good at making unorthodox shots is not the definition of tennis talent.
Yes, it is. Santoro was hugely talented, same with Dolgopolov and Flo Mayer. It's not the definition of talent, but it is definitely a very good example of talent.

DrJules
05-25-2011, 06:05 PM
Djokovic is way more talented than Federer. What a question.

Aren't we entitled to our opinions? :rolleyes:

If that is true his achievements to the age of 24 are rather poor for somebody with so much talent and he should have achieved more if he applied himself.

bright
05-25-2011, 06:17 PM
Djokovic is way more talented than Federer. What a question.
And Barsalona is the most talented football team:yeah:

Get a grip, girl. In case you haven't been informed, the sport of tennis hasn't started in 2011.

your_valentine
05-25-2011, 06:18 PM
There's nobody more talented than Federer. Step to this.

Roadmap
05-25-2011, 06:35 PM
My mum

Raiden
05-25-2011, 07:31 PM
The evidence for JMDP's superior tennis talent speaks for itself.


1cSbx66NFoo


i_3k_xQuxyY


Despite being too tall (coincidentally as tall as another goat Michael Jordan) Delpo can turn his opponent who is having an apparent massive court advantage into a stuffed chimp in a split second, like no one else can, in THE most stunning way by an unequaled display of tennis craft, at the highest stages of the sport.

Orka_n
05-25-2011, 07:32 PM
Wow... this proof is really too overwhelming... I don't think any other player has ever made a few good shots in their career. Especially not this fool named Federer, he really sucks at improvising on the court.

Then again, maybe you're just trolling. In which case, you're not funny.

Nole fan
05-25-2011, 07:33 PM
I'm dead serious too. :rolleyes:

Dougie
05-25-2011, 07:33 PM
Yes, it is. Santoro was hugely talented, same with Dolgopolov and Flo Mayer. It's not the definition of talent, but it is definitely a very good example of talent.

They have an unconventional style of play, but that alone doesnīt qualify as talent. Santoro is one of a kind, obviously, but Mayer..? Jump-drop shots are kind of funny and heīs probably a nasty opponent to play against, but I wouldnīt call him that talented.

Raiden
05-25-2011, 07:38 PM
There's nobody more talented than Federer. Step to this.

Wow... this proof is really too overwhelming... I don't think any other player has ever made a few good shots in their career. Especially not this fool named Federer, he really sucks at improvising on the court.

Then again, maybe you're just trolling. In which case, you're not funny.We're talking about other players, not Fed.

Stay on topic >> who OTHER than Fed is supremely talented (it's not too relevant whether equally talented or just below or just above Fed, as long as he's closer to Fed in terms of talent than anyone else)

Orka_n
05-25-2011, 07:40 PM
Yes, it is. Santoro was hugely talented, same with Dolgopolov and Flo Mayer. It's not the definition of talent, but it is definitely a very good example of talent.Quiet down already, loudmouth. I said touch IS a part of how you define talent, but it's not all of it. Tennis talent also includes having an instinctive understanding of the game and a natural ability to be in control on the court. Federer for example is someone who exceeds at that.

Orka_n
05-25-2011, 07:42 PM
We're talking about other players, not Fed.

Stay on topic >> who OTHER than Fed is supremely talented (it's not too relevant whether equally talented or just below or just above Fed, as long as he's closer to Fed in terms of talent than anyone else)The topic is "Who do you think is/was more talented than Federer?" just so you know.

Not that it matters either way. Delpo is not even close to topping this list.
They have an unconventional style of play, but that alone doesnīt qualify as talent. Santoro is one of a kind, obviously, but Mayer..? Jump-drop shots are kind of funny and heīs probably a nasty opponent to play against, but I wouldnīt call him that talented.Agree.

tests
05-25-2011, 08:12 PM
to the poster who said that if novak is more talented than fed, than he has not accomplished jack shit at his age.

Stop equaling accomplishments with talent..

You can be supremely talented, but not achieve jack shit

Nole fan
05-25-2011, 08:16 PM
If that is true his achievements to the age of 24 are rather poor for somebody with so much talent and he should have achieved more if he applied himself.

At this age Roger 6 > Nole 2... but who knows, Nole could win the remaining 3 slams of the year. :shrug:

tests
05-25-2011, 08:27 PM
no one is ever close

mcenroes backhand was the most hideous shot to watch i have ever seen

he was never in position, it looked weak and overall just a terrible shot

the only player who i can think of who had it all (literally) was safin

safin could even be a mental giant sometimes

shame he didnt even realise 50% of his potential


damn, not even 50 % of his potential?! :eek::eek:

I think safin could have easily won 6-8 slams.. too bad he didnt

DrJules
05-25-2011, 08:27 PM
At this age Roger 6 > Nole 2... but who knows, Nole could win the remaining 3 slams of the year. :shrug:

The Nadaltards on MTF would have a nervous breakdown and require major psychological assistance to overcome the trauma of seeing Nadal losing 3 GS finals in a row to the same player and possibly having an 0-8 record against Djokovic this year if that happened.

DrJules
05-25-2011, 08:32 PM
no one is ever close

mcenroes backhand was the most hideous shot to watch i have ever seen

he was never in position, it looked weak and overall just a terrible shot

the only player who i can think of who had it all (literally) was safin

safin could even be a mental giant sometimes

shame he didnt even realise 50% of his potential

It was his immense talent, hand and eye coordination and timing that enabled so many of McEnroe's shots to work so effectively.

Lopez
05-25-2011, 09:19 PM
I'm dead serious too. :rolleyes:

Bought that one, hook line and sinker :yeah:. Nice one :lol:.

At this age Roger 6 > Nole 2... but who knows, Nole could win the remaining 3 slams of the year. :shrug:

That would be awesome, even for the MTF reaction alone :lol: (and of course for a fan like me :angel:)

Vida
05-25-2011, 09:32 PM
at giving interviews (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEzqhTmbQfI&feature=relmfu)? nobody.

tests
05-25-2011, 10:08 PM
at giving interviews (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEzqhTmbQfI&feature=relmfu)? nobody.

:D:D

seriously thought, anyone approach mr.federer talent wise?

Arkulari
05-25-2011, 10:11 PM
Nole is a great baseliner but in terms of pure talent (shotmaking ability) he doesn't come close to Roger: can't do a tweener, a backhand half volley smash, the shot he did against Nole in USO 08...

JVltZ7zWJXE

lWW-rUFge34

Very solid in FH and specially BH, good serve, great mobility but no more talent than Roger IMO.

tests
05-25-2011, 10:12 PM
Nole is a great baseliner but in terms of pure talent (shotmaking ability) he doesn't come close to Roger: can't do a tweener, a backhand half volley smash...

Very solid in FH and specially BH, good serve, great mobility but no more talent than Roger IMO.

what about safin or nalbandian?

And i don't necessarily equate talent with doing tweeners....

Arkulari
05-25-2011, 10:16 PM
I made the point that I was talking about shotmaking ability ;)

Safin was extremely talented, his match against Roger at the AO 05 is a classic and showed how good he could be when on, sadly he lacked focus.

Nalbandian has a great BH but I think he has been very overrated and put into a pedestal.

Talent: Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Rafter, Federer

Vida
05-25-2011, 10:16 PM
Nole is a great baseliner but in terms of pure talent (shotmaking ability) he doesn't come close to Roger: can't do a tweener, a backhand half volley smash, the shot he did against Nole in USO 08...

Very solid in FH and specially BH, good serve, great mobility but no more talent than Roger IMO.

tweener = talent? on what planet?

+ rafas BH half volley smash >,= feds, does that mean talent-wise rafa >,= fed? :p

nsidhan
05-25-2011, 10:17 PM
More talented than Fed?....None. He is a stubborn freak of nature.

Arkulari
05-25-2011, 10:19 PM
tweener = talent? on what planet?

+ rafas BH half volley smash >,= feds, does that mean talent-wise rafa >,= fed? :p

Again = SHOTMAKING ABILITY, I just thought of that specific shot :lol: but there are many that come to him easily unlike the rest of people on tour.

tests
05-25-2011, 10:27 PM
I made the point that I was talking about shotmaking ability ;)

Safin was extremely talented, his match against Roger at the AO 05 is a classic and showed how good he could be when on, sadly he lacked focus.

Nalbandian has a great BH but I think he has been very overrated and put into a pedestal.

Talent: Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Rafter, Federer

so you think borg/mcenroe/edberg/rafter/federer are the top echelon talent wise?

What is the next tier in your opinion, and who belongs in it?

jcempire
05-25-2011, 10:29 PM
who cares

Vida
05-25-2011, 10:30 PM
Again = SHOTMAKING ABILITY, I just thought of that specific shot :lol: but there are many that come to him easily unlike the rest of people on tour.

shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

Nole fan
05-25-2011, 10:35 PM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

Awesome description. :yeah:

By the way, who says Djokovic isn't able to hit tweeners? Maybe he doesn't risk them in a match, but I'm sure he can make them all the same. Tweener = flourish shot. Goes with Federer's personality. Overall, djoko's baseline game >>>>>>>>>>>> federer.

Arkulari
05-25-2011, 10:37 PM
I'm talking from a purely personal point of view here, most players are very consistent, don't make many UEs but it's just baseline game, with little variety.

With Roger, in a single match you can see all kinds of shots, he might miss yes but there's always "magical" moments that leave you like WTF? HOW DID HE DO THAT? and he can make it look effortless, unlike other players who have to sweat bullets to do something similar.

And for the record, Roger's serve at his prime >>>> Nole's, agree with the rest, the only two things Nole is now better than Roger ever was at his prime are ROS and BH (probably one of the best twohanders I've seen)

Nole fan
05-25-2011, 10:48 PM
at giving interviews (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEzqhTmbQfI&feature=relmfu)? nobody.

I agree, thoughtful and intelligent. (when he's not talking non-stop about his past achievements)

Orka_n
05-25-2011, 10:49 PM
Overall, djoko's baseline game >>>>>>>>>>>> federer.No, no, no.
Djokovic has no clear weakness in his groundgame, agreed. But you forget that in Roger's prime there was mostly only Nadal who could really exploit Federer's weaker backhand side. Fed made up for it with his footwork and his backhand was good enough back then.
But more than anything: Djokovic doesn't have and will probably never have a weapon like Federer's forehand. He could hit winners from everywhere with that shot. Because of that I'd take JesusFed's groundgame over Novak's.

barbadosan
05-25-2011, 10:52 PM
I'm talking from a purely personal point of view here, most players are very consistent, don't make many UEs but it's just baseline game, with little variety.

With Roger, in a single match you can see all kinds of shots, he might miss yes but there's always "magical" moments that leave you like WTF? HOW DID HE DO THAT? and he can make it look effortless, unlike other players who have to sweat bullets to do something similar.

And for the record, Roger's serve at his prime >>>> Nole's, agree with the rest, the only two things Nole is now better than Roger ever was at his prime are ROS and BH (probably one of the best twohanders I've seen)

Not sure I agree with that ROS assessment Arkulari. At his peak/prime, all the guys who would normally record a ton of aces against other players would end up with something like 5-15% of their normal ace count when playing Fed, including Roddick and his toweringly fast serves (including that 140 mph serve that went back at him faster than he sent it down.. lol - well almost)

r3d_d3v1l_
05-25-2011, 11:23 PM
The talent of Djokovic itīs his movement and defense capabilities. All the rest isnīt that special. The big difference between him and Federer is that Federer can basically produce every single shot on the book without much effort. So every single match he plays has different twists because he uses so much variety.

And to combine that with consistency is astonishing.

Nole fan
05-25-2011, 11:31 PM
The talent of Djokovic itīs his movement and defense capabilities. All the rest isnīt that special. The big difference between him and Federer is that Federer can basically produce every single shot on the book without much effort. So every single match he plays has different twists because he uses so much variety.

And to combine that with consistency is astonishing.

His backhand down the line is the best shot in the game. :shrug:

Arkulari
05-25-2011, 11:35 PM
The talent of Djokovic itīs his movement and defense capabilities. All the rest isnīt that special. The big difference between him and Federer is that Federer can basically produce every single shot on the book without much effort. So every single match he plays has different twists because he uses so much variety.

And to combine that with consistency is astonishing.

This :)

r3d_d3v1l_
05-26-2011, 12:30 AM
His backhand down the line is the best shot in the game. :shrug:

It is a great shot, but Safin/Nalbadian or Murray, to name a few, can also produce that shot with the same efficiency.

The thing is that he moves so well that he doesnīt feel the need or better, he doesnīt get in those situations where he needs to get something out of the book in order to get away from it like Federer does with the half-volleys from the baseline, the tweenerīs and so on.

And thatīs all about risks. Fededer gambles with the winner/ue ratio because he needs to be offensive and a winner machine in order to dominate the circuit. In other hand, Djokovic just has the defensive capability and counter-punch stance that puts him comfortably in the baseline.

tests
05-26-2011, 12:30 AM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

Movement Fed >>>>> Nole imho

SetSampras
05-26-2011, 12:31 AM
Its tough to say because the dynamic of tennis has changed to much just compared to even 30 years ago. In terms of raw all around talent, Fed was one of the best but because the game has changed so much to a strict one dimensional baseline bash fest all those attributes are not there to showcase. You can win ANY SLAM playing pretty much the same style from the same area of the court. Before due to the entire game in general (surface speeds, racket technology, etc.) you had to rely more on precision, strategic game planning, CHANGING you game up and applying different strategies of course.

Can't go wrong with laver, Fed, Sampras, Borg, Pancho, Rosewall,Lendl, Mac, Agassi, Nadal Tilden. These guys are the elite of the elite and all have an argument at being the most talented tennis players of all time.

But also you have to factor in the mental toughness department along with talent. because mental toughness is a talent in itself in this game. So many highly talented guys like Safin and Nalbandian or Stich or Krajciek, or Hoad etc.. Had immense talent but at the end of the day not a whole lot to show for it.

tests
05-26-2011, 12:31 AM
I'm talking from a purely personal point of view here, most players are very consistent, don't make many UEs but it's just baseline game, with little variety.

With Roger, in a single match you can see all kinds of shots, he might miss yes but there's always "magical" moments that leave you like WTF? HOW DID HE DO THAT? and he can make it look effortless, unlike other players who have to sweat bullets to do something similar.

And for the record, Roger's serve at his prime >>>> Nole's, agree with the rest, the only two things Nole is now better than Roger ever was at his prime are ROS and BH (probably one of the best twohanders I've seen)

Whose bh do you think is better, noles or safins in his prime?

tests
05-26-2011, 12:35 AM
Its tough to say because the dynamic of tennis has changed to much just compared to even 30 years ago. In terms of raw all around talent, Fed was one of the best but because the game has changed so much to a strict one dimensional baseline bash fest all those attributes are not there to showcase. You can win ANY SLAM playing pretty much the same style from the same area of the court. Before due to the entire game in general (surface speeds, racket technology, etc.) you had to rely more on precision, strategic game planning, CHANGING you game up and applying different strategies of course.

Can't go wrong with laver, Fed, Sampras, Borg, Pancho, Rosewall,Lendl, Mac, Agassi, Nadal Tilden. These guys are the elite of the elite and all have an argument at being the most talented tennis players of all time.

But also you have to factor in the mental toughness department along with talent. because mental toughness is a talent in itself in this game. So many highly talented guys like Safin and Nalbandian or Stich or Krajciek, or Hoad etc.. Had immense talent but at the end of the day not a whole lot to show for it.

I agree with everything except with nadal having a case as the most talented of all time, same with lendl. I can't comment on tilden or rosewall or pancho though

tests
05-26-2011, 12:36 AM
Mental toughness is NOT a talent, even in the game of tennis. Lleyton hewitt is mentally tough, but unfortunately not talented.

tests
05-26-2011, 12:37 AM
The talent of Djokovic itīs his movement and defense capabilities. All the rest isnīt that special. The big difference between him and Federer is that Federer can basically produce every single shot on the book without much effort. So every single match he plays has different twists because he uses so much variety.

And to combine that with consistency is astonishing.

yep, and this is also why i think guys like safin/nalbandian are incredibly talented. They too can produce every single shot in the book without much effot.

SetSampras
05-26-2011, 12:41 AM
Mental toughness is NOT a talent, even in the game of tennis. Lleyton hewitt is mentally tough, but unfortunately not talented.

I always felt mental toughness was talent because of the fact,there arent too many players that posses this facet of the game. Imagine the type of career Safin or Nalbandian could had with mental toughness and focus. I think thats tennis is missing these days. You have alot of good players who could make a run at the top guys but do not have the mental toughness and focus to maintain and throw their name in the hat with those top guys. Hewitt was pretty talented though. He wasnt an ELITE talent but he possessed an uncanny ability of counterpunching attack before his movement shit the bed and he was riddled with injuries. Not to many guys could counterpunch like Hewitt at his peak. That IS a talent.

Its hard to find players that have ALL those intangibles. Supreme talent with mental toughness to stay on top for long periods of time. Most guys just have the strokes and the game, but not have the focus and mental toughness. Alot of guys have great focus and determination but not the game.


Thats why most eras you only get 1-2 guys within a 10 year span that have all those intangibles.

tests
05-26-2011, 01:30 AM
I always felt mental toughness was talent because of the fact,there arent too many players that posses this facet of the game. Imagine the type of career Safin or Nalbandian could had with mental toughness and focus. I think thats tennis is missing these days. You have alot of good players who could make a run at the top guys but do not have the mental toughness and focus to maintain and throw their name in the hat with those top guys. Hewitt was pretty talented though. He wasnt an ELITE talent but he possessed an uncanny ability of counterpunching attack before his movement shit the bed and he was riddled with injuries. Not to many guys could counterpunch like Hewitt at his peak. That IS a talent.

Its hard to find players that have ALL those intangibles. Supreme talent with mental toughness to stay on top for long periods of time. Most guys just have the strokes and the game, but not have the focus and mental toughness. Alot of guys have great focus and determination but not the game.


Thats why most eras you only get 1-2 guys within a 10 year span that have all those intangibles.


good points.

And i agree, imagine if safin/nalby had mental strenght and confidence (and also no injuries) in their careers... fed would not have as many slams as he currently has... and safin would probably have dominated from 2000-2003.


I could have seen safin with 7-8 slams.

tests
05-26-2011, 01:32 AM
take for example a guy like borg. Was he talented in the same sense as a federer,safin,mcenroe? No...

But he was a workhorse, athletic as hell... and incredibly mentally tough. That is too a talent, although not in the same sense that we associate talent with the guys of fed/safin/McEnroe caliber

paseo
05-26-2011, 01:47 AM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

Fed's FH >> Djokovic's BH >>> Djokovic's FH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fed's BH.

There's a reason why Fed's FH was regarded one of the best shots ever in tennis.

Topspindoctor
05-26-2011, 01:54 AM
serve, fed >= nole


:lol:

Youngerer's serve is something Nole could ever only dream about. Give credit where it's due. All other points are correct.

tennismaster1978
05-26-2011, 02:06 AM
I say Donald Young

tests
05-26-2011, 03:31 AM
Fed's FH >> Djokovic's BH >>> Djokovic's FH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fed's BH.

There's a reason why Fed's FH was regarded one of the best shots ever in tennis.


feds bh in his prime was a really good shot... on par with djokers forehand imho

Mechlan
05-26-2011, 06:58 AM
Not sure I agree with that ROS assessment Arkulari. At his peak/prime, all the guys who would normally record a ton of aces against other players would end up with something like 5-15% of their normal ace count when playing Fed, including Roddick and his toweringly fast serves (including that 140 mph serve that went back at him faster than he sent it down.. lol - well almost)

Yeah, Federer's return is hugely underrated here, as is his backhand. In his prime, neither of these shots was less than "very good". Now both are pretty shit, so I understand that people might have forgotten how good they could be.

sco
05-26-2011, 07:25 AM
Its tough to say because the dynamic of tennis has changed to much just compared to even 30 years ago. In terms of raw all around talent, Fed was one of the best but because the game has changed so much to a strict one dimensional baseline bash fest all those attributes are not there to showcase. You can win ANY SLAM playing pretty much the same style from the same area of the court. Before due to the entire game in general (surface speeds, racket technology, etc.) you had to rely more on precision, strategic game planning, CHANGING you game up and applying different strategies of course.

Can't go wrong with laver, Fed, Sampras, Borg, Pancho, Rosewall,Lendl, Mac, Agassi, Nadal Tilden. These guys are the elite of the elite and all have an argument at being the most talented tennis players of all time.

But also you have to factor in the mental toughness department along with talent. because mental toughness is a talent in itself in this game. So many highly talented guys like Safin and Nalbandian or Stich or Krajciek, or Hoad etc.. Had immense talent but at the end of the day not a whole lot to show for it.

Definitely don't see Lendl as that talented - very hard working. Sorry but mental toughness has nothing to do with talent. Federer is supremely talented but I don't think he's mentally tough (compared to the greats). Likewise, I see Borg and Nadal as mentally tough but not that talented (compared to the greats). I see talent as something you're born with (innate) - not worked hard to develop.

bokehlicious
05-26-2011, 07:30 AM
And people keep arguing with that hoax nole spam :rolleyes: is that because she's supposed to be hawt? :stupid: next she'll claim Dijina's game to be better than Fed's and the clever mtfers will try to "prove" her she's wrong :stupid:

sco
05-26-2011, 07:51 AM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

If you're talking peaks, I think you're overrating nole and underrating fed. On almost everything except the BH, I'd take Fed - much more variety in serve, return, fh, slice, smash, net game. In particular, fed's return (Fed used to make fodder of big servers - Roddick, Del Porto, Berdych) is being underrated. The BH definitely goes to Nole because it's nole's great strength and Fed's weakness. Movement, I'd call even. Physical/endurance and intangibles (knowing what shot/when to use, court awareness), I'd also give to Fed. Let's give Nole a chance to maintain this level for a while before gracing him with having the best of every shot.

tests
05-26-2011, 08:05 AM
Definitely don't see Lendl as that talented - very hard working. Sorry but mental toughness has nothing to do with talent. Federer is supremely talented but I don't think he's mentally tough (compared to the greats). Likewise, I see Borg and Nadal as mentally tough but not that talented (compared to the greats). I see talent as something you're born with (innate) - not worked hard to develop.

co-sign

Macbrother
05-26-2011, 08:17 AM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

Perfectly reasonable comparison of '11 Fed vs Nole.

Oh wait, you were talking about peak Fed? :lol:

So grossly incorrect in breakdown and conclusion I wouldn't know where to begin.

Vida
05-26-2011, 08:35 AM
Perfectly reasonable comparison of '11 Fed vs Nole.

Oh wait, you were talking about peak Fed? :lol:

So grossly incorrect in breakdown and conclusion I wouldn't know where to begin.

take your pick it isnt nuclear physics :lol:

anyway, I wouldn't say its that much incorrect. you have to keep in mind what we're looking at here is talent as a permanent category, to put it like that. not fed vs roddick, or fed vs blake, or whatever...

push fed on his BH, for example, and you'll notice he'll keep running around to hit his forehand over and over again, and sure, you'll see some great forehands and you might think its 'talent', but attack him enough and he'll have no room to show his talent.

anyway, dont really want to denigrate the great man, but that I do think HIS talent is overblown, that I do. there are many very, extremely talented players out there.

bokehlicious
05-26-2011, 08:37 AM
Jogi knew it better from the beginning, that Federer dude is not better than Arnaud Boetsch talent wise :shrug: :smoke:

Chiseller
05-26-2011, 09:08 AM
Im talking 'peaks' here.
Got me. For a split second I thought you were for real!

Sophocles
05-26-2011, 09:24 AM
If you're talking peaks, I think you're overrating nole and underrating fed. On almost everything except the BH, I'd take Fed - much more variety in serve, return, fh, slice, smash, net game. In particular, fed's return (Fed used to make fodder of big servers - Roddick, Del Porto, Berdych) is being underrated. The BH definitely goes to Nole because it's nole's great strength and Fed's weakness. Movement, I'd call even. Physical/endurance and intangibles (knowing what shot/when to use, court awareness), I'd also give to Fed. Let's give Nole a chance to maintain this level for a while before gracing him with having the best of every shot.

Spot on. Peak Federer was better at returning big first serves. Peak Nole is better at punishing 2nd serves. So I'd say overall their returns were on a par. Peak Federer's backhand was a weakness only in a very relative sense: the only times it ever broke down were against Nadal on clay. He has a far better slice than Djoker & more variety off that wing. But as Djoker can be more consistently aggressive with the shot I'll give the nod to him. Physical endurance I'd say they were now even on.

Vida
05-26-2011, 09:52 AM
Spot on. Peak Federer was better at returning big first serves. Peak Nole is better at punishing 2nd serves. So I'd say overall their returns were on a par. Peak Federer's backhand was a weakness only in a very relative sense: the only times it ever broke down were against Nadal on clay. He has a far better slice than Djoker & more variety off that wing. But as Djoker can be more consistently aggressive with the shot I'll give the nod to him. Physical endurance I'd say they were now even on.

feds BH including slice is a great shot but has a flaw, a glitch. and no matter how good it is that flaw cant be masked. so no way it is even 'a nod' weaker than nole's. its like comparing a slingshot (though a very good one), an almost ancient weapon cave people used to hunt birds, and a machine gun of today.

Vida
05-26-2011, 09:54 AM
feds BH:

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090404003843/zelda/images/thumb/1/1e/Slingshot_%28Twilight_Princess%29.png/150px-Slingshot_%28Twilight_Princess%29.png

Ibracadabra
05-26-2011, 10:01 AM
Fed was a better mover at peak than nole is now.

alter ego
05-26-2011, 10:26 AM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

I didn't know drugs were legal in Serbia.:scared:

Vida
05-26-2011, 10:41 AM
I didn't know drugs were legal in Serbia.:scared:

theyre not ;)

Nole fan
05-26-2011, 10:43 AM
Safin/nalby must be the most overrated players in tennis history. :rolleyes:

Corey Feldman
05-26-2011, 10:45 AM
I didn't know drugs were legal in Serbia.:scared:they arnt but puting internet in mental homes is

Sophocles
05-26-2011, 10:53 AM
feds BH including slice is a great shot but has a flaw, a glitch. and no matter how good it is that flaw cant be masked. so no way it is even 'a nod' weaker than nole's. its like comparing a slingshot (though a very good one), an almost ancient weapon cave people used to hunt birds, and a machine gun of today.

But at his peak, only one player on one surface could consistently expose that flaw.

Even so, I grant you peak Djoker's backhand beats peak Fed's by more than a nod. But certainly not by miles.

alter ego
05-26-2011, 10:59 AM
theyre not ;)

Then I hope you won't end up in jail.

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:03 AM
they arnt but puting internet in mental homes is

not yet.

Then I hope you won't end up in jail.

no reason to be in jail.

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:05 AM
But at his peak, only one player on one surface could consistently expose that flaw.

Even so, I grant you peak Djoker's backhand beats peak Fed's by more than a nod. But certainly not by miles.

err. BH flaw was exposed on all surfaces and by more than one player. basically most players with decent enough BH could pin fed and make him run around it over and over and over again. sure, fed has other assets so it even'd out at the end coz he could take advantage over other players weaknesses.

that is until a player with no weaknesses at all showed up.

bokehlicious
05-26-2011, 11:08 AM
err. BH flaw was exposed on all surfaces and by more than one player. basically most players with decent enough BH could pin fed and make him run around it over and over and over again. sure, fed has other assets so it even'd out at the end coz he could take advantage over other players weaknesses.

that is until a player with no weaknesses at all showed up.

You're weren't watching tennis when Fed was at his peak ;)

Sophocles
05-26-2011, 11:14 AM
err. BH flaw was exposed on all surfaces and by more than one player. basically most players with decent enough BH could pin fed and make him run around it over and over and over again. sure, fed has other assets so it even'd out at the end coz he could take advantage over other players weaknesses.

I said only one player on one surface could consistently expose the flaw.

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:21 AM
I said only one player on one surface could consistently expose the flaw.

that speaks more about those other players inability than feds ability on the BH side.

barbadosan
05-26-2011, 11:22 AM
Oh dear Vi-troll-da :)

Orka_n
05-26-2011, 11:25 AM
that speaks more about those other players inability than feds ability on the BH side.If Federer was able to protect his backhand with other skills such as footwork, well then the backhand wasn't that big of a weakness, was it? :shrug:

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:27 AM
Oh dear Vi-troll-da :)

:lol: you fed fans are amazing you know that. you've been looking and worshiping fed for years like he is an immortal who cant do no wrong, that you (some of you in particular) got to this point that any objective notion that does not portray fed as the father of jesus chist and all his brethren - is trolling. gimme a break and give it a rest.

Orka_n
05-26-2011, 11:29 AM
:lol: you fed fans are amazing you know that. you've been looking and worshiping fed for years like he is an immortal who cant do no wrong, that you (some of you in particular) got to this point that any objective notion that does not portray fed as the father of jesus chist and all his brethren - is trolling. gimme a break and give it a rest.To be fair she is a much better poster than you. Also that "inability of other players at the time"-crap sounds like SdG.

Forehander
05-26-2011, 11:31 AM
:lol: you fed fans are amazing you know that. you've been looking and worshiping fed for years like he is an immortal who cant do no wrong, that you (some of you in particular) got to this point that any objective notion that does not portray fed as the father of jesus chist and all his brethren - is trolling. gimme a break and give it a rest.

lol you worship Novak Djokovic as "the perfect player". Give us a fking break.

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:40 AM
If Federer was able to protect his backhand with other skills such as footwork, well then the backhand wasn't that big of a weakness, was it? :shrug:

sure he was thats why he won 16 slams.

To be fair she is a much better poster than you. Also that "inability of other players at the time"-crap sounds like SdG.

ummm. ok.

lol you worship Novak Djokovic as "the perfect player". Give us a fking break.

I dont and I wont. I can post as much as you and you asking me not to is arrogance. s shove it.

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:42 AM
:lol: fed fans going all defensive. whats it called, passive aggressive? a sign of weakness when things are going well, picture perfect as you imagined they are.

well wake up.

Sophocles
05-26-2011, 11:43 AM
that speaks more about those other players inability than feds ability on the BH side.

In a one-on-one sport such as tennis there will always be an element of both. The inability in this case is the inability to generate the highest degree of topspin in history. You'll find the same "inability" in all eras ever played.

Orka_n
05-26-2011, 11:45 AM
:lol: fed fans going all defensive. whats it called, passive aggressive? a sign of weakness when things are going well, picture perfect as you imagined they are.

well wake up.Good stuff, keep working on your smuginess. That'll be a true asset come ACC season.

Vida
05-26-2011, 11:47 AM
Good stuff, keep working on your smuginess. That'll be a true asset come ACC season.

yea and you keep working on your arrogance, it'll be a real asset in your life.

barbadosan
05-26-2011, 11:49 AM
:lol: fed fans going all defensive. whats it called, passive aggressive? a sign of weakness when things are going well, picture perfect as you imagined they are.

well wake up.

What on earth are you nattering on about? :confused:

(Sorry Orka, quoted your post first time inadvertently)

Raiden
05-26-2011, 02:23 PM
I always felt mental toughness was talent because of the fact,there arent too many players that posses this facet of the gameControlling your nerves is a talent, but not a tennis talent.

Otherwise you might as well add physical strength and whatever other non-tennis thing you fancy :lol:

Nole fan
05-26-2011, 02:35 PM
:lol: fed fans going all defensive. whats it called, passive aggressive? a sign of weakness when things are going well, picture perfect as you imagined they are.

well wake up.

:lol: So many truths in just one paragraph. :yeah:

rocketassist
05-26-2011, 02:46 PM
shotmaking ability, hmm. what do you mean exactly? take djoker now (for example), guy doesnt miss - much like fed in his heyday. so I really dont see much of the difference there in favor of fed :shrug:

oh you mean specific shots? lets see than (in nole vs fed example):

serve, fed >= nole
return, nole >>>>> fed
FH, fed >> nole
BH, nole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fed
slice, fed >>>>> nole (but who cares about slice anyway?)
movement, fed >= nole
smash, fed >> nole
net game, fed >> nole

Im talking 'peaks' here.

so not a whole lot of difference in shot by shot thing. and if you look at the groundstrokes, frankly, nole has the edge there.

Peak Fed blew players off the court. Peak Djokovic only blows Rafito off court, and beats everyone else by being solid (which is good enough in 2011).

Djoker wins on the backhand only. As for who cares about slice, that's a typical Nowtard.

Macbrother
05-26-2011, 05:57 PM
take your pick it isnt nuclear physics :lol:

anyway, I wouldn't say its that much incorrect. you have to keep in mind what we're looking at here is talent as a permanent category, to put it like that. not fed vs roddick, or fed vs blake, or whatever...

push fed on his BH, for example, and you'll notice he'll keep running around to hit his forehand over and over again, and sure, you'll see some great forehands and you might think its 'talent', but attack him enough and he'll have no room to show his talent.

anyway, dont really want to denigrate the great man, but that I do think HIS talent is overblown, that I do. there are many very, extremely talented players out there.
Your abortive attempts to denigrate Federer and his era are really rather irrelevant, particularly in this context -- given we are talking strictly of his talent and the shots he could produce. As for taking my pick well rocketassist summed it up quite nicely as did Orka_n's last post.
you fed fans are amazing you know that. you've been looking and worshiping fed for years like he is an immortal who cant do no wrong, that you (some of you in particular) got to this point that any objective notion that does not portray fed as the father of jesus chist and all his brethren - is trolling. gimme a break and give it a rest
So you are going to point fingers at Fed fans with your right hand, and worship Nole with your left? :lol:

Macbrother
05-26-2011, 06:00 PM
Controlling your nerves is a talent, but not a tennis talent.

Otherwise you might as well add physical strength and whatever other non-tennis thing you fancy :lol:

Tennis is an athletic sport. One of the most athletic sports on the planet, actually. Therefore it stands to reason athletic factors such as speed, agility, strength, endurance, should most certainly qualify as tennis talents, no? Tennis doesn't just boil down to being able to hit with pretty technique. There's a host of other factors in play.

luie
05-26-2011, 06:13 PM
How talent fed could have been if he went "gluten free"????

sco
05-26-2011, 06:31 PM
Spot on. Peak Federer was better at returning big first serves. Peak Nole is better at punishing 2nd serves. So I'd say overall their returns were on a par. Peak Federer's backhand was a weakness only in a very relative sense: the only times it ever broke down were against Nadal on clay. He has a far better slice than Djoker & more variety off that wing. But as Djoker can be more consistently aggressive with the shot I'll give the nod to him. Physical endurance I'd say they were now even on.

Federer never seemed to want to punish 2nd serves - it's not that I didn't think he could if he wanted to - just that he seemed content to return deep and work from there. Same with the drop shot - I knew he could do it but he scoffed at it until he was past his peak. I thought he could have made life easier being more aggressive on the return (especially against Nadal - it's not like he didn't know it was coming to his backhand) and employing the drop shot but I guess his peak was "easy" enough.

Sorry I still give physical endurance to Fed. Granted he didn't play many 5 setters in his peak but I never felt that he got tired. Don't know how anyone can call them even here with Nole's history of breathing problems. Like everything else, Nole hasn't done it for a long enough time to convince me.

bright
05-26-2011, 06:37 PM
:lol: So many truths in just one paragraph. :yeah:

Why would the girl of your hotness spending days and nights long on the internet forum? Something not clicking here:confused:

Vida
05-26-2011, 06:42 PM
Peak Fed blew players off the court. Peak Djokovic only blows Rafito off court, and beats everyone else by being solid (which is good enough in 2011).

Djoker wins on the backhand only. As for who cares about slice, that's a typical Nowtard.

numbers actually say that novaks streak tops both of feds streaks (35 and 41 matches) in pretty much every category; most telling of all, a complete ownage of two GOATS. I can dig the article up for you, Im just too lazy now.

Federer never seemed to want to punish 2nd serves - it's not that I didn't think he could if he wanted to - just that he seemed content to return deep and work from there. Same with the drop shot - I knew he could do it but he scoffed at it until he was past his peak. I thought he could have made life easier being more aggressive on the return (especially against Nadal - it's not like he didn't know it was coming to his backhand) and employing the drop shot but I guess his peak was "easy" enough.

Sorry I still give physical endurance to Fed. Granted he didn't play many 5 setters in his peak but I never felt that he got tired. Don't know how anyone can call them even here with Nole's history of breathing problems. Like everything else, Nole hasn't done it for a long enough time to convince me.

:lol: oh boy.

:zzz:

Vida
05-26-2011, 06:44 PM
Why would the girl of your hotness spending days and nights long on the internet forum? Something not clicking here:confused:

hey hey pall, whats it to you?

sco
05-26-2011, 06:53 PM
err. BH flaw was exposed on all surfaces and by more than one player. basically most players with decent enough BH could pin fed and make him run around it over and over and over again. sure, fed has other assets so it even'd out at the end coz he could take advantage over other players weaknesses.

that is until a player with no weaknesses at all showed up.

As far as I remember only one player could pin Fed and make him run around it - that's Nadal. Why don't you give Rafa credit instead of criticizing Fed? It's not like any other left-hander (or any other player) could generate top spin like Rafa's.

Sheer arrogance to think that any player could have no weakness. All players look invincible when they're playing well/dominating. The hard part (and what separates the greats) is to consistently maintain that level to rack up those Grand Slams. From Connors to Borg to McEnroe to Lendl to Sampras to Fed to Nadal to Nole, they all looked invincible. But can you maintain the physical (injuries), mental(desire), emotional (does life/marriage/kids interfere) sides together to do it long enough. So far, Fed has done it the best (peak) and longest.

Nole fan
05-26-2011, 06:55 PM
Why would the girl of your hotness spending days and nights long on the internet forum? Something not clicking here:confused:

Are you asking about my personal life? :scratch:
I don't spend days and nights in this forum, just concentrated spells. Why do you care? :lol:

sco
05-26-2011, 07:02 PM
numbers actually say that novaks streak tops both of feds streaks (35 and 41 matches) in pretty much every category; most telling of all, a complete ownage of two GOATS. I can dig the article up for you, Im just too lazy now.

:lol: oh boy.

:zzz:
It's laughable if you think that Fed in his current state is anywhere near Fed at his peak. As I said - it's consistency - Fed shows flashes of brilliance but can't sustain it - what he did at his peak for years.

LOL at Novak's "streak." Check back when he's reached the SF of 23 grand slams covering almost 6 years. Early days yet for Nole. Why are fans so what have you done lately?

DrJules
05-26-2011, 07:05 PM
In the end talent is a means to an end which is winning the biggest trophies in mens tennis.

Based on the premise that Djokovic is more talented than Federer, Federer has managed to convert his lesser talent and ability to much more effect than Djokovic. Surely that is far more impressive.

Vida
05-26-2011, 07:06 PM
As far as I remember only one player could pin Fed and make him run around it - that's Nadal. Why don't you give Rafa credit instead of criticizing Fed? It's not like any other left-hander (or any other player) could generate top spin like Rafa's.

Sheer arrogance to think that any player could have no weakness. All players look invincible when they're playing well/dominating. The hard part (and what separates the greats) is to consistently maintain that level to rack up those Grand Slams. From Connors to Borg to McEnroe to Lendl to Sampras to Fed to Nadal to Nole, they all looked invincible. But can you maintain the physical (injuries), mental(desire), emotional (does life/marriage/kids interfere) sides together to do it long enough. So far, Fed has done it the best (peak) and longest.

the BH thing, I actually dont believe topspin on his BH is the only thing that bothers fed. being consistent and powerful against it also works. safin, nalby, novak, to name a few, created quite a lot of problems for fed that way.

the second paragraph, well I agree. I meant no weakness in technical terms. there are some conditions that suit him less than some others.

oranges
05-26-2011, 07:12 PM
numbers actually say that novaks streak tops both of feds streaks (35 and 41 matches) in pretty much every category; most telling of all, a complete ownage of two GOATS. I can dig the article up for you, Im just too lazy now.


:lol: He still has a losing H2H against both of them, talk about ownage and talk about delusions

Vida
05-26-2011, 07:17 PM
:lol: He still has a losing H2H against both of them, talk about ownage and talk about delusions

it'll even out once they retire. fed had an upper hand over young nole in experience (he was in his prime) while novak choked a lot, naturally, when you play your first slam final vs GOAT-to-be, you do get a little nervous. now, nole is entering his peak, while fed is getting old. similar with nadal.

and all that without even bringing up the gluten allergy.

oranges
05-26-2011, 07:19 PM
No, it won't even out. Hope that helps.

your_valentine
05-26-2011, 07:19 PM
This thread is still going? I see that people still have problem with acknowledging that nobody matches Roger's talent. Stay pressed, haters.

Vida
05-26-2011, 07:20 PM
No, it won't even out. Hope that helps.

any arguments, something?

oranges
05-26-2011, 07:22 PM
any arguments, something?

Why bother, you're so drunk with hype right now, it won't matter one way or anther :lol: It simply won't happen. He's their pigeon, yet you're here denigrating one of them. Hilarious.

Vida
05-26-2011, 07:29 PM
Why bother, you're so drunk with hype right now, it won't matter one way or anther :lol: It simply won't happen. He's their pigeon, yet you're here denigrating one of them. Hilarious.

mmm, Im not denigrating anyone. what, coz I say feds BH sux compared to players who have a great BH, I denigrate the player?

I think the problem is in blind fed-worshipers who believe (falsely) fed doesnt have a fault in his game/mentality. those same people dont actually believe he was lucky to win 16 slams, like if he had any luck he'd win 40 slams. thats what their posts lead to.

bright
05-26-2011, 07:34 PM
Are you asking about my personal life? :scratch:
I don't spend days and nights in this forum, just concentrated spells. Why do you care? :lol:
They told me you're hot as hell.:shrug:

Makes me wonder why would a girl of such hotness spend time on the internet? I can observe you in any thread every 15 mins so I conclude you do spend your time here.

Would make more sense if you were a lunatic a-la Vida, but as it is now it makes no sense whatsoever:confused:

Vida
05-26-2011, 07:38 PM
They told me you're hot as hell.:shrug:

Makes me wonder why would a girl of such hotness spend time on the internet? I can observe you in any thread every 15 mins so I conclude you do spend your time here.

Would make more sense if you were a lunatic a-la Vida, but as it is now it makes no sense whatsoever:confused:

lunatic?! impossible.

rocketassist
05-26-2011, 07:40 PM
mmm, Im not denigrating anyone. what, coz I say feds BH sux compared to players who have a great BH, I denigrate the player?

I think the problem is in blind fed-worshipers who believe (falsely) fed doesnt have a fault in his game/mentality. those same people dont actually believe he was lucky to win 16 slams, like if he had any luck he'd win 40 slams. thats what their posts lead to.

Djoker's peak backhand is better, so? That's the only facet he wins at

Nole fan
05-26-2011, 07:40 PM
They told me you're hot as hell.:shrug:

Makes me wonder why would a girl of such hotness spend time on the internet? I can observe you in any thread every 15 mins so I conclude you do spend your time here.

Would make more sense if you were a lunatic a-la Vida, but as it is now it makes no sense whatsoever:confused:

:lol: In your opinion what i should be doing instead?

bright
05-26-2011, 07:40 PM
lunatic?! impossible.
Seriously, give it a rest.

Nole is the greatest thing ever happened to tennis. All of us have agreed. Give it a rest from now on.

bright
05-26-2011, 07:41 PM
:lol: In your opinion what i should be doing instead?

Dating some guys as hot as yourself? Living a life after all?;) MTF is life in some weird sort of way but....

Nole fan
05-26-2011, 07:44 PM
Dating some guys as hot as yourself? Living a life after all?;) MTF is life in some weird sort of way but....

There is time for everything. ;)

Vida
05-26-2011, 07:48 PM
Djoker's peak backhand is better, so? That's the only facet he wins at

he wins at? its not a video game man. :lol: sorry, might be a language thing.

anyway, having one groundstroke shot that much better than the other guy changes entire matchup issue.

but I dont really want to twist the topic into nole > fed debate, so I say: fed > nole in talent (and I mean that).

oh and nole clay game > feds ;) :yeah:

Seriously, give it a rest.

Nole is the greatest thing ever happened to tennis. All of us have agreed. Give it a rest from now on.

I wont :yeah:

Dating some guys as hot as yourself? Living a life after all?;) MTF is life in some weird sort of way but....

you're new here, Id advise you to be nice to posters around here coz its not yours to tangle with their private lives. you've been warned and dont think youre immune to other people posts.

rocketassist
05-26-2011, 07:50 PM
he wins at? its not a video game man. :lol: sorry, might be a language thing.

anyway, having one groundstroke shot that much better than the other guy changes entire matchup issue.

but I dont really want to twist the topic into nole > fed debate, so I say: fed > nole in talent (and I mean that).

oh and nole clay game > feds ;) :yeah:




Wait till he wins a Roland Garros before proclaiming that, mind.

bright
05-26-2011, 07:51 PM
Wait till he wins a Roland Garros before proclaiming that, mind.

They think they're living 2 weeks ahead the world in Serbia:yeah:

oranges
05-26-2011, 08:25 PM
mmm, Im not denigrating anyone. what, coz I say feds BH sux compared to players who have a great BH, I denigrate the player?

I think the problem is in blind fed-worshipers who believe (falsely) fed doesnt have a fault in his game/mentality. those same people dont actually believe he was lucky to win 16 slams, like if he had any luck he'd win 40 slams. thats what their posts lead to.

I'm hardly a Fed worshiper, let alone a blind one and I'm telling you you're drunkenly happily delusional and all your posts here only provide comedic value. Both talent-wise and what his top game was actually like, Fed is leaps and bounds above anyhting Djokovic is able to produce. Not that it matters particularly to argue these points becuase after all is said and done for both of them, the numbers will be enough.

finishingmove
05-26-2011, 08:27 PM
berrer is more talented

Vida
05-26-2011, 08:34 PM
I'm hardly a Fed worshiper, let alone a blind one and I'm telling you you're drunkenly happily delusional and all your posts here only provide comedic value. Both talent-wise and what his top game was actually like, Fed is leaps and bounds above anyhting Djokovic is able to produce. Not that it matters particularly to argue these points becuase after all is said and done for both of them, the numbers will be enough.

still no arguments whatsoever.

:zzz:

Orka_n
05-26-2011, 08:48 PM
Just watch some matches from 2006 and shut up already.
What's with this crappy forum? I've never found so many delusional people in one place.

Zagor
05-26-2011, 08:58 PM
The only player I've ever seen that IMO can compare to Fed's talent is peak Sampras but then again Mcenroe,Nastase,Borg etc. were before my time.

Vida
05-26-2011, 09:01 PM
laver was also insanely talented. quite possibly > fed.

an alrounder :shrug:

Pirata.
05-26-2011, 09:05 PM
oh and nole clay game > feds ;) :yeah:

Wow. There is delusional and there is DELUSIONAL.

There is time for everything. ;)

Look, if you're not going to date these hot guys instead of coming to MTF, send them to me, okay? :p

Zagor
05-26-2011, 09:06 PM
laver was also insanely talented. quite possibly > fed.

an alrounder :shrug:

Well he was way,way before my time LOL.I did see some matches of him and he does seem like someone whom I would like to watch in his prime,very aggressive off both wings,looks for the earliest opportunity to finish at the net etc. Now he was relatively short but at time given how many low bouncing surfaces there were that might have been even a strength rather than a weakness.

green25814
05-26-2011, 09:11 PM
Mecir

oranges
05-26-2011, 09:17 PM
still no arguments whatsoever.

:zzz:

Well, we can't all have soudn arguments like you :haha:

luie
05-26-2011, 09:18 PM
A-Rod

Vida
05-26-2011, 09:19 PM
Well, we can't all have soudn arguments like you :haha:

you definitely havent given any :shrug: