Which 2 slam wonder was better Djokovic or Rafter [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Which 2 slam wonder was better Djokovic or Rafter

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-09-2011, 02:03 PM
different styles. Different attitudes. Both have big female fanbases.

But who was better?

Purple Rainbow
02-09-2011, 02:16 PM
Djokovic has already surpassed Rafter in achievements. Easily.

All Rafter has on the Djoker is one week as world number one.

ossie
02-09-2011, 02:37 PM
djoker won his slams in the strongest era in mens tennis plus he can still win more slams.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-09-2011, 03:41 PM
ahem i think we are forgetting the matter of 2 slams finals at wimby

& the agassi rafter trilogy

rocketassist
02-09-2011, 06:35 PM
It's close you know, but Rafter's two Wimbledon finals and one week as a number one keep him ahead for now.

djoker won his slams in the strongest era in mens tennis plus he can still win more slams.

:bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs: :bs:

Everko
02-09-2011, 06:36 PM
Djokovic and its not that close

hicdick
02-09-2011, 06:43 PM
It's close you know, but Rafter's two Wimbledon finals and one week as a number one keep him ahead for now.


agreed. + he's SEXIER!


djokovic won't end up being a '2 slam wonder' though.

Young 8
02-09-2011, 06:49 PM
Diokovic will win more than 2

Everko
02-09-2011, 07:21 PM
delete this thread. Idiotic poll choices

Chartreuse
02-09-2011, 09:19 PM
Nole. But he won't remain a 2 slam wonder

Mjau!
02-09-2011, 09:26 PM
What is Rafter's resumé?

BULLZ1LLA
02-09-2011, 11:00 PM
Rafter beat Sampras at the US Open and Cincy. He also beat Agassi twice at Wimbledon Semis. Would Djokovic even take a set from those guys at slams? I doubt it. Rafter the far better player.

Rafter also made Roland Garros Semis.

.-Federers_Mate-.
02-09-2011, 11:03 PM
Rafter and its not even close

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-09-2011, 11:13 PM
rafter had a hard court grass court dominant period in the late 90s early 2000s

back to back US opens (including a win against sampras no less)

between 99-01 rafter met agassi in the SF at wimby consecutively

rafter came out 2-1 in the H2H, it was agassi's most dominant period.
the 3 matches- all 5 setters are probably the 3 best matches ever played at wimbledon- the style difference and the intensity was incredible

he made a SF at RG and a SF at the AO

the AO is the biggest shocker, since its probably the one the whole of australia were really after

his game style is probably the best example of 90s tennis
he really played a gorgeous classical style
great service motion, but even better volley skills, flawless technique- he played serve and volley tennis better than probably anyone else

sampras (famously) hated him probably because his serve and volley was technically better (he didn't have sampras' guts or insane 2nd serve)

he was a late bloomer, but definitely retired early- on his last year on tour he made a SF and a final at a slam
couple of masters finals

fun fact- he made a rome final- but was definitely not a clay courter
a true gentleman, after winning the us open in 97 98, both times he donated half his prize money to charity

after beating sampras in the finals of a masters, sampras was asked about what the difference between them was

sampras made the infamous "10 slams remark" and also that a true champion could defend his title

rafter duely, defended his title, (knocking sampras out of the us open)

i cant believe people are rating djokovic ahead of rafter who played during agassi and sampras' peak years

MIMIC
02-09-2011, 11:15 PM
Rafter beat Sampras at the US Open and Cincy. He also beat Agassi twice at Wimbledon Semis. Would Djokovic even take a set from those guys at slams? I doubt it. Rafter the far better player.

Rafter also made Roland Garros Semis.

Theoretical match vs. actual match to prove a point

Could you be any more illogical?

rocketassist
02-09-2011, 11:18 PM
What is Rafter's resumé?

2 Grand Slams (2 US Opens)
2 Grand Slam runner-up (both Wimbledon)
A week at no 1 in the world, more than most
2 Masters Series titles (the back to back Canada/Cincy double)
Reached all four GS semis, and the finals of two of them in an era of very contrasting surfaces


Djokovic

2 Grand Slams (2 Australian Opens)
2 GS runner-up (2 US Opens)
A couple of weeks at no 2
5 Masters Series
1 YEC
Reached all four GS semis (though I feel it's a little tainted by the homogenization of surfaces, as good a record as it is)


It's closer. But I feel Rafter's era was tougher and I give the edge to him. Reaching 2 Wimby finals in a hugely competitive grass era with the likes of Henman, Escude, Sampras, Krajicek, Philippoussis, Hewitt, Martin, Ivanisevic, Agassi etc was hugely impressive. He's more remembered too if you ask the average tennis mark.

If Nole wins another one then yeah he will overtake Patrick. But I'll always prefer Rafter, in game style and personality. Brilliant fella.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-09-2011, 11:24 PM
rafter also played with real surface differences

you couldn't dominate all surfaces in the 90s

pete at his best won 3 in a row and got owned at RG (his record there before 97 was very impressive)

rafter is part of the reason the 90s were such a strong era

djokvic is a good hard courter
shit on slow grass- he would get routined by pioline on REAL grass
ok on clay.... no actually he's shit on clay- there's only 2 good clay courters in the world- and almugro aint one of them- and djokovic still cant do shit

i think overall slam counts are misleading

borgs 11 is > than emersons 12

regardless of all that- djokovic has only won 2 slams when federer was either fucking poised or olderer
and worse yet, djokovic actually let nadull beat him at the US OPEN- nadulls worst surface

beating murray in a slam final isn't an achievement- even federer looks embarrassed to beat murray because its so easy

Macbrother
02-09-2011, 11:31 PM
It's too bad Rafter was such a late bloomer. The man had immaculate net play and kick serves that played into his style perfectly -- but he was somewhat limited in his return game and to a lesser extent his ground strokes. Both players really fit their respective eras well, Rafter, the aggressive net player, Djokovic, the complete baseliner. As Djokovic will almost undoubtedly retire with significantly better achievements, the argument is really superfluous, and more about preference. Rafter's defeats over Sampras at the USO were the stuff of legends, though.

Priam
02-09-2011, 11:41 PM
Rafter, but Djoker can certainly pass him (and he will).

BULLZ1LLA
02-09-2011, 11:53 PM
Djokovic only ever won the Australian Open. And has not even made the Final of a clay or grass slam. Rafter was in 3 Wimbledon Finals , Roland Garros Semi , Australian Open Semi , and won 2 US Opens.

And like I said before can you really imagine Djokovic even threatening Sampras at the US Open and Agassi at Wimbledon(twice)? Rafter beat them both at those venues. The slam resume is clearly in favor of Rafter. No comparison.

Djokovic is more of a reactive player , and he beat Murray because Murray was not aggressive. Rafa pushed Djokovic around and beat him at the USO comfortably. Rafter was the opposite to Murray because Rafter took the game away from his opponent , made them look clueless.

alfonsojose
02-10-2011, 02:30 AM
Nole

Yandr001
02-10-2011, 02:33 AM
Rafter. By a long way.

siffleanimaux
02-10-2011, 03:48 AM
:rolleyes: at "classy aussie (oxymoron lol)"

when will you people learn that there are all different kinds of people in every country..

siffleanimaux
02-10-2011, 03:50 AM
2 Grand Slams (2 US Opens)
2 Grand Slam runner-up (both Wimbledon)
A week at no 1 in the world, more than most
2 Masters Series titles (the back to back Canada/Cincy double)
Reached all four GS semis, and the finals of two of them in an era of very contrasting surfaces


Djokovic

2 Grand Slams (2 Australian Opens)
2 GS runner-up (2 US Opens)
A couple of weeks at no 2
5 Masters Series
1 YEC
Reached all four GS semis (though I feel it's a little tainted by the homogenization of surfaces, as good a record as it is)


It's closer. But I feel Rafter's era was tougher and I give the edge to him. Reaching 2 Wimby finals in a hugely competitive grass era with the likes of Henman, Escude, Sampras, Krajicek, Philippoussis, Hewitt, Martin, Ivanisevic, Agassi etc was hugely impressive. He's more remembered too if you ask the average tennis mark.

If Nole wins another one then yeah he will overtake Patrick. But I'll always prefer Rafter, in game style and personality. Brilliant fella.

Youngest player to do so!

Donnay Quixote
02-10-2011, 04:49 AM
Rafter was 3-0 against Federer , beating him on every surface..... Grass,clay and hard court

And he did it the same year Fed beat Sampras.

Pat actually destroyed Roger.



.

Benny_Maths
02-10-2011, 05:59 AM
And like I said before can you really imagine Djokovic even threatening Sampras at the US Open and Agassi at Wimbledon(twice)?

Why not? Sampras lost to some random at the US Open in 1994, one of his best seasons.

Arkulari
02-10-2011, 06:09 AM
I love Patrick, he was one of my first tennis faves but I gotta say that so far Nole's résumé is better

FlameOn
02-10-2011, 06:18 AM
Nole.

Rafter has an amazingly low title-count for a former #1.

FairWeatherFan
02-10-2011, 06:21 AM
Rafter competed in an era of legends, winning two grand slams and reaching the no 1 ranking, all the while playing the most attractive tennis imaginable. Djokovic is competing in an era of clowns, where all the surfaces play exactly the same way, and he can play his dull, unimaginative baseline tennis all year round.

In short, Rafter will always have the superior career to Djokovic, even if this talentless Balkan clown manages to fluke his way to another ten slams (and in this pathetic era of tennis, if he were to do so it would not surprise me in the least).

tnosugar
02-10-2011, 07:17 AM
Rafter competed in an era of legends, winning two grand slams and reaching the no 1 ranking, all the while playing the most attractive tennis imaginable. Djokovic is competing in an era of clowns, where all the surfaces play exactly the same way, and he can play his dull, unimaginative baseline tennis all year round.

In short, Rafter will always have the superior career to Djokovic, even if this talentless Balkan clown manages to fluke his way to another ten slams (and in this pathetic era of tennis, if he were to do so it would not surprise me in the least).



hm, i bet people in the era of legends you are talking about, also complained and cried for the era of edberg, becker, lendl, etc etc...

the fact is, most of those legends would be heaving and grasping for air after three sets, with the pace the game is played at today. Each era has its specifics and its legends.

rafa_maniac
02-10-2011, 08:22 AM
Putting aside dubious claims of "weak eras" and the like, I'd give it to Nole simply off the strength of his resume. 3 more MS titles, a YEC, Olympic medal, he's been a much more consistent fixture in the top 3 and has as many deep runs in Slams at a much younger age.

laurie-1
02-10-2011, 12:24 PM
This thread I'm afraid does not make sense as one player is retired and the other has at least 6 years left at the top bar any serious injury.

A better comparison would be Rafter v Kafelnikov or Safin.

samjones
02-10-2011, 12:33 PM
Rafter's '97 USO was a joke. He got lucky that Pete had an off day and lost to somebody else. He got lucky that Andre was having an off-year.

His '98 USO was legit.

Nole's '08 and '11 AO's were both perfectly legit - he was quite simply the world's best tennis player for those 2 weeks in January both times and he proved it. It might have been even more legit if Rafa has decided to show up... but that shouldn't take anything away from the fact that Nole played the world's best and they couldn't take a set from him.

There are interesting parallels, though. Especially the Greg Rusedski/Jo Willy comparison.

samjones
02-10-2011, 12:34 PM
This thread I'm afraid does not make sense.

Then breaak out your Funk and Wagnalls and start reading with the intention of comprehending.

Ouragan
02-10-2011, 12:52 PM
Puh lease. Djokovic is ahead already at 23

laurie-1
02-10-2011, 02:05 PM
Then breaak out your Funk and Wagnalls and start reading with the intention of comprehending.

You're not a politician are you? Best to quote my whole sentence and not part of it, then comprehension will be easy for you. :yeah:

Nole fan
02-10-2011, 03:11 PM
agreed. + he's SEXIER!


djokovic won't end up being a '2 slam wonder' though.

O Niki, you're so clueless. :rolleyes:

It's a no brainer. Novak has the largest female fanbase because he's sexier. ;)

Getta
02-10-2011, 03:14 PM
nobody has defined it more precisely. :)

rocketassist
02-10-2011, 04:36 PM
O Niki, you're so clueless. :rolleyes:

It's a no brainer. Novak has the largest female fanbase because he's sexier. ;)

hicdick is a she? A scouse bird then! :lol:

Sapeod
02-10-2011, 05:20 PM
Rafter is the better player. However, looking at titles and all that Djokovic has the better career.

Mjau!
02-10-2011, 05:36 PM
Novak's results are clearly, slightly better then thanks to the ATPWTF and 150% more Masters 1000 titles. It must have been much easier to reach #1 in the 90's if Rafter did it with those results so it desn't really count... :shrug: Was Pete and André more inconsistent than Rafa & Rogie?

Rafter's '97 USO was a joke. He got lucky that Pete had an off day and lost to somebody else. He got lucky that Andre was having an off-year.

-97 was a career high for Agassi. :yeah:

Nole fan
02-10-2011, 05:52 PM
hicdick is a she? A scouse bird then! :lol:

Nah. She is a he.

Terra Massive is your new nickname, Storm Lee? :rolls:

DrJules
02-10-2011, 05:59 PM
Rafter competed in an era of legends, winning two grand slams and reaching the no 1 ranking, all the while playing the most attractive tennis imaginable. Djokovic is competing in an era of clowns, where all the surfaces play exactly the same way, and he can play his dull, unimaginative baseline tennis all year round.

In short, Rafter will always have the superior career to Djokovic, even if this talentless Balkan clown manages to fluke his way to another ten slams (and in this pathetic era of tennis, if he were to do so it would not surprise me in the least).

Djokovic may not be the most talented in the rarified atmosphere of the top 5 current players in the world (I consider Federer, Nadal and Murray have more talent), but must have immense talent to reach top 3 level and GS winning level.

DrJules
02-10-2011, 06:03 PM
2 Grand Slams (2 US Opens)
2 Grand Slam runner-up (both Wimbledon)
A week at no 1 in the world, more than most
2 Masters Series titles (the back to back Canada/Cincy double)
Reached all four GS semis, and the finals of two of them in an era of very contrasting surfaces


Djokovic

2 Grand Slams (2 Australian Opens)
2 GS runner-up (2 US Opens)
A couple of weeks at no 2
5 Masters Series
1 YEC
Reached all four GS semis (though I feel it's a little tainted by the homogenization of surfaces, as good a record as it is)


It's closer. But I feel Rafter's era was tougher and I give the edge to him. Reaching 2 Wimby finals in a hugely competitive grass era with the likes of Henman, Escude, Sampras, Krajicek, Philippoussis, Hewitt, Martin, Ivanisevic, Agassi etc was hugely impressive. He's more remembered too if you ask the average tennis mark.

If Nole wins another one then yeah he will overtake Patrick. But I'll always prefer Rafter, in game style and personality. Brilliant fella.

Very true.

As Rafter has retired and Djokovic is almost certain to add key titles this thread will eventually be made redundant as Djokovic is almost certain to overtake Rafter.

DrJules
02-10-2011, 06:11 PM
Rafter is the better player. However, looking at titles and all that Djokovic has the better career.

Questionable if you compare Djokovic and Rafter:

Serve: Little in it although Djokovic has more variety while Rafter mostly served a very good kick serve.
Forehand: Djokovic well ahead.
Backhand: Djokovic well ahead.
Return of serve: Djokovic well ahead.
Passing shots: Djokovic well ahead.
Volley: Rafter in a different league and well ahead.
Overhead: Rafter in a different league and well ahead.
Movement: Slight edge to Djokovic.
Mental toughness: Little difference.

Rafter was a better attacking player with an exceptional net game. Djokovic seems to be much better in every other aspect.

Sapeod
02-10-2011, 06:16 PM
Rafter managed to win 2 slams in Sampras' era. That's much better than winning 2 against an average Federer, Murray and Nadal.

Djokovic would win zilch in Sampras' era.
Rafter would probably win zilch in this era because all the courts are so slow.

Rafter >>>>>>>>>>>>> Djokovic.

DrJules
02-10-2011, 06:22 PM
Rafter managed to win 2 slams in Sampras' era. That's much better than winning 2 against an average Federer, Murray and Nadal.

Djokovic would win zilch in Sampras' era.
Rafter would probably win zilch in this era because all the courts are so slow.

Rafter >>>>>>>>>>>>> Djokovic.

Agreed Rafter would not win on today's courts, but Djokovic could have won on the rebound ace courts of the Australian Open in the 90's.

Mjau!
02-10-2011, 06:26 PM
Puh lease. Djokovic is ahead already at 23

Nole is 24, he was born in -87.

Mjau!
02-10-2011, 06:28 PM
Novak is like André except he move much better. Nole could win many major slams in 90's!

Sapeod
02-10-2011, 06:30 PM
Agreed Rafter would not win on today's courts, but Djokovic could have won on the rebound ace courts of the Australian Open in the 90's.
I doubt it. With Agassi around and Sampras and others like Rafter and Kafelnikov, he wouldn't have a chance of winning an Australian Open in the 90s.
No way in the others, not even Roland Garros. The clay field was 500 times better than it is nowadays, when Djokovic is the #3 claycourter :o

Dougie
02-10-2011, 06:42 PM
Rafter is one of my all-time favorites, but I have to say Djokovic takes this one. The comparison is rather pointless, because Nole will win more Slams, and will eventually end up with far more achievemnts than Pat.

If Rafter would have won one Wimbledon, this would be a totally different comparison, but despite his chances he couldn´t pull it off, which is a shame. The fact that he held the 1 spot for a while doesn´t count for that much since it was only for a short period of time.

As someone already said, for a plyer of his calibre, Rafter actually won very few titles. His record is even weirder if you exclude his dream season of 1998, when he won Toronto, Cincinnati, Long Island and US Open. Before his 1st US Open title he only had one win ( Manchester 1994 ) and after his second GS he only won twice at s-Hertogenbosch and once in Indianapolis. So his career record outside the two US Opens is actually not THAT great, and his peak form didn´t last long at all.

Djokovic already has way more titles, and he´ll win many more. But he´ll never be as enjoyable player to watch as Rafter!

samjones
02-10-2011, 07:41 PM
You're not a politician are you? Best to quote my whole sentence and not part of it, then comprehension will be easy for you. :yeah:

I assumed that you must not have understood what was written because your response made it sound like you've never seen anyone compare 2 sports figures from different eras before.

I guess I overestimated you. Sorry.

samjones
02-10-2011, 07:44 PM
Nole is 24, he was born in -87.

2011 - 1987 = 24.

Very good, Mjau! You did basic math!

As soon as his birthday rolls around on May 22 this post won't be quite so embarassing any more.

oranges
02-10-2011, 07:45 PM
I assumed that you must not have understood what was written because your response made it sound like you've never seen anyone compare 2 sports figures from different eras before.

I guess I overestimated you. Sorry.

Don't know how's your reading comprehension, but no one else has problems understanding laurie's point, not least of all becuase it was explicitly stated and it's only one sentence. Major kudos to you, new low.

Nole fan
02-10-2011, 07:49 PM
Nole is 24, he was born in -87.

Wrong. Novak is 23 (22.05.1987). One week younger than Murray and 1 year younger than Rafa. So he's the youngest of the Top 10.

samjones
02-10-2011, 07:50 PM
[QUOTE=Terra Massive;10765758]Rafter managed to win 2 slams in Sampras' era. That's much better than winning 2 against an average Federer, Murray and Nadal.
[QUOTE]

Yabbut he didn't beat Pete in 1997. Somebody else did and Pat Rafter just happened to parlay that other guy's good fortune into a slam title for himself. Lucky guy. Scuse me for saying so, but I don't think that anybody would have claimed that Pat Rafter was the world's best tennis player in September 97.

Nole won 2 AO's - easily - and he beat Rog both times.

oranges
02-10-2011, 07:53 PM
Yabbut he didn't beat Pete in 1997. Somebody else did and Pat Rafter just happened to parlay that other guy's good fortune into a slam title for himself. Lucky guy. Scuse me for saying so, but I don't think that anybody would have claimed that Pat Rafter was the world's best tennis player in September 97.

Nole won 2 AO's - easily - and he beat Rog both times.

.. and the second time when he played him and beat him he was just lucky of course :lol:

Nole_1990
02-10-2011, 07:54 PM
Rafter managed to win 2 slams in Sampras' era. That's much better than winning 2 against an average Federer, Murray and Nadal.

Djokovic would win zilch in Sampras' era.
Rafter would probably win zilch in this era because all the courts are so slow.

Rafter >>>>>>>>>>>>> Djokovic.
so why can't murray win in the average federer nadal era

you such ahater,besides federer and nadal are by far the best 2 players in history
and yet he has 2 slams in this strong era
and iam not very good at counting but i think 2 is greater than 0

FlameOn
02-10-2011, 07:56 PM
Djokovic may not be the most talented in the rarified atmosphere of the top 5 current players in the world (I consider Federer, Nadal and Murray have more talent), but must have immense talent to reach top 3 level and GS winning level.

No. Just no.

luie
02-10-2011, 07:59 PM
On a competitive nature I would have to give the edge to rafter for now as he was able to beat the dominatant champions of his era @ slam level sampras/agassi.
Novak has failed @ defeating nadull in a slam or BO5 to date.

Dougie
02-10-2011, 08:07 PM
[QUOTE=Terra Massive;10765758]Rafter managed to win 2 slams in Sampras' era. That's much better than winning 2 against an average Federer, Murray and Nadal.
[QUOTE]

Yabbut he didn't beat Pete in 1997. Somebody else did and Pat Rafter just happened to parlay that other guy's good fortune into a slam title for himself. Lucky guy. Scuse me for saying so, but I don't think that anybody would have claimed that Pat Rafter was the world's best tennis player in September 97.

Nole won 2 AO's - easily - and he beat Rog both times.

I dont think we can say that Djokovic is undoubtly the best player right now, either. In 98 Rafter won Toronto, Cincy, Long Island and US Open pretty much in a row. I don´t think anyone can claim he wasn´t playing the best tennis in the world during that period.

As for not beating Pete in 97, who cares? You can only beat guys you play against, it´s not Rafters fault Pete didnt make it further in the tournament.

Matt01
02-10-2011, 08:49 PM
On a competitive nature I would have to give the edge to rafter for now as he was able to beat the dominatant champions of his era @ slam level sampras/agassi.
Novak has failed @ defeating nadull in a slam or BO5 to date.


But since "RAPHEAL NADULL" is just "A PRETTY FACE & MUSCLE
NOTHING MORE", he's not the benchmark for tennis these days anyway, isn't he? :lol: Nole beat Roger "The GOAT" Federer" both times he won a Slam and that should count for something as well, no? ;)

laurie-1
02-10-2011, 11:19 PM
I assumed that you must not have understood what was written because your response made it sound like you've never seen anyone compare 2 sports figures from different eras before.

I guess I overestimated you. Sorry.

I somehow suspect that you actually overestimate yourself....

SetSampras
02-10-2011, 11:53 PM
Tough to say really.. Rafter beat some greats on the big stage. By the late 90s though, Pete was already on the downside of his career ( He also got injured at one of their USO encounters) much as Fed from 08 on so beating these guys at their best, means more. But Rafter also beat Agassi during some of his most dominant period outside of 95. Djoker can't beat Nadal at a slam.

Rafter does have the #1 as well. Djoker hasn't even reached #2. And Rafter has some bigger wins as far slams go on more then just one slam surface by taking out Pete on hards and Andre on grass. Also that French Open semis.

Rafter by a hair IMO but Djoker will surpass him most certainly

of course I guess if we say that Rafter's 97 USO was a joke. Maybe Djoker's 2008 and 2011 slams were as well. He can't beat Nadal but Nadal got injured and he sidestepped him. In 08 Fed had mono, and now Fed is passed his best days.


In many ways I look at BOTH's 2 slam wins as kind of circumstantial as well. They managed slam wins when the respective dominant players were either ill/injured or past their primes. By 08 Fed's domination was over.. Nadal is injured. Pete 98 or so Pete's prime was over. Sure Pete and Roger managed some big wins here and there but in terms of their domination on a consistent basis it all ended 10 years apart really

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-11-2011, 12:13 AM
set sampras, thats bs

sampras wasn't the same dominant force after 97'

he played the best grass court tennis of his life in 1999

wimbledon final 99'
agassi playing insane tennis- was blown off the court by sampras

samjones
02-11-2011, 12:32 AM
[QUOTE=samjones;10766235]
I dont think we can say that Djokovic is undoubtly the best player right now, either. In 98 Rafter won Toronto, Cincy, Long Island and US Open pretty much in a row. I don´t think anyone can claim he wasn´t playing the best tennis in the world during that period.

As for not beating Pete in 97, who cares? You can only beat guys you play against, it´s not Rafters fault Pete didnt make it further in the tournament.

I think we can say Nole was undoubtedly the best player in the last 2 weeks in January, that's for sure.

I didn't say Rafter wasn't great in 98. I said he wasn't great in 97. He was just lucky, that's all.

oranges
02-11-2011, 12:34 AM
So, enlighten us, who was the best player in the two weeks of the 97 USO?

GlennMirnyi
02-11-2011, 12:36 AM
Faker can't hold a candle to the mighty Rafter.

samjones
02-11-2011, 01:20 AM
So, enlighten us, who was the best player in the two weeks of the 97 USO?

There's no question that it was Pete.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 01:33 AM
He LOST, so it clearly wasn't.

SetSampras
02-11-2011, 01:58 AM
set sampras, thats bs

sampras wasn't the same dominant force after 97'

he played the best grass court tennis of his life in 1999

wimbledon final 99'
agassi playing insane tennis- was blown off the court by sampras

No he wasn't. All you have to do is go back and check the results and record books. Pete had a major DOWN YEAR in 98. And in 99 Agassi took the Number 1 back for a while. Im not saying he couldn't put bring some great tennis to the table from 98 on but it wasn't to the consistency that he did from 93-97. Just as Roger from 08-on. Roger has brought some great tennis to the table every now and then since 08 but not nearly on the consistent dominant basis he did from 04-07. Sure Pete had some awesome matches, but he was already declining from 98-on. Just as Roger began declining from 98-on. If you followed both from. Pete from 93-97 and Roger 03-07 you will see big differences in terms of week in week out consistency and overrall domination.

You can still bring some big tennis to the table every now and then when you are past your best days, but you can't bring all year like u can in your prime.

Pete's prime was 93-97 in terms of prime dominant consistency. Not 98-on.

samjones
02-11-2011, 02:06 AM
He LOST, so it clearly wasn't.

Not to Rafter, he didn't. You wanna be the best, you gotta beat the best.... and that Rafter did not do. Not in 97 he didn't. He beat some guy who beat some guy who beat some guy who beat Pete.

Pete underestimated his low-seeded opponent. If he hadn't he would have had one more USO to add to the list.

.-Federers_Mate-.
02-11-2011, 02:17 AM
No he wasn't. All you have to do is go back and check the results and record books. Pete had a major DOWN YEAR in 98. And in 99 Agassi took the Number 1 back for a while. Im not saying he couldn't put bring some great tennis to the table from 98 on but it wasn't to the consistency that he did from 93-97. Just as Roger from 08-on. Roger has brought some great tennis to the table every now and then since 08 but not nearly on the consistent dominant basis he did from 04-07. Sure Pete had some awesome matches, but he was already declining from 98-on. Just as Roger began declining from 98-on. If you followed both from. Pete from 93-97 and Roger 03-07 you will see big differences in terms of week in week out consistency and overrall domination.

You can still bring some big tennis to the table every now and then when you are past your best days, but you can't bring all year like u can in your prime.

Pete's prime was 93-97 in terms of prime dominant consistency. Not 98-on.

So agreed with this esp the comparison with Roger.

Branimir
02-11-2011, 02:22 AM
So Djokovic wasn't the best during two weeks in Australia cause he beat some guy who beat some guy who beat Nadal...
Djokovic: 19 titles
Rafter: 11 Titles

Therefore: Djokovic already has better career than Rafter.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 02:41 AM
Not to Rafter, he didn't. You wanna be the best, you gotta beat the best.... and that Rafter did not do. Not in 97 he didn't. He beat some guy who beat some guy who beat some guy who beat Pete.

Pete underestimated his low-seeded opponent. If he hadn't he would have had one more USO to add to the list.

And Djokovic definitely beat the best in 08, a mononucleosis sufferer and Tsonga. See what I just did?

And Korda was actually a GS champion you know, and won on a 5th set TB....

Rafter was the best player over the 2 weeks, get over it. He beat Pete a year later anyway so why wouldn't he have done it in 97?

samjones
02-11-2011, 02:50 AM
So Djokovic wasn't the best during two weeks in Australia cause he beat some guy who beat some guy who beat Nadal...

Rafael Nadal is the only guy Nole didn't beat at AO... then only one worth a shit, any way. Nadal and Raonic - LOL!

samjones
02-11-2011, 02:54 AM
And Djokovic definitely beat the best in 08, a mononucleosis sufferer and Tsonga. See what I just did?

And Korda was actually a GS champion you know, and won on a 5th set TB....

Rafter was the best player over the 2 weeks, get over it. He beat Pete a year later anyway so why wouldn't he have done it in 97?

Pete '98 wasn't the same as Pete '97 or Pete '96. Pete '98 was like Rog '10. Just not quite the same.

That's why. Yeah - Korda's one of those guys who proves that almost anybody can win a slam if the stars align. Was he one of those bums who beat one of those bums who beat Pete at USO '97?

Mjau!
02-11-2011, 03:04 AM
I still think "-97 was a career high for Agassi" was really funny...

oranges
02-11-2011, 03:09 AM
There's no question that it was Pete.

Was he locked in a room somewhere and had to default a match or did he lose? If the latter, according to what criteria was he the best player in those two weeks?

Mjau!
02-11-2011, 03:22 AM
What was so impressive about Djokovic beating a very sick man and a french :silly: anyway??? :shrug:

It must be one of the least impressive major wins...

oranges
02-11-2011, 03:26 AM
Mjau stop trolling, for the love of God

Mjau!
02-11-2011, 03:34 AM
What do you mean? If we're in the business of comparing major wins to each other then Nole's AO -08 is clearly rather weak. He only beat an obviously sick Rogie and Tsonga. It's not so impressive...

EDIT: What is wrong with that 0? :confused: So freaky! :eek:

samjones
02-11-2011, 11:37 AM
Was he locked in a room somewhere and had to default a match or did he lose? If the latter, according to what criteria was he the best player in those two weeks?

I don't know if you ever heard of Pete Sampras, but he was a really good player. '97 was a mighty good year for him. Patrick Rafter - meh.... he was alright. He got lucky as all fuck he didn't have to play Pete at USO '97 cuz Pete would have cleaned his clock.

samjones
02-11-2011, 11:41 AM
Don't know how's your reading comprehension, but no one else has problems understanding laurie's point, not least of all becuase it was explicitly stated and it's only one sentence. Major kudos to you, new low.

Speaking for the entire board again, are we? Did you poll each and every registered user to see if they had any problem understanding Laurie's point?

Laurie clearly did not understand OP. Or maybe she just hasn't been around the block. Sports messages boards compare players of different eras all the time.

Matt01
02-11-2011, 12:02 PM
What do you mean? If we're in the business of comparing major wins to each other then Nole's AO -08 is clearly rather weak. He only beat an obviously sick Rogie and Tsonga. It's not so impressive...

EDIT: What is wrong with that 0? :confused: So freaky! :eek:


An "obviously sick Rogie" who despite that terrible, life-threatening illness was still able to reach the semi finals of a Slam. :rolleyes: And Tsonga was the best player of that other half, not Nole's fault that he had to play him in the final. Djoker's AO win 2008 was as legit as his win in 2011 (and both were quite impressive I must say :worship:).

luie
02-11-2011, 12:28 PM
But since "RAPHEAL NADULL" is just "A PRETTY FACE & MUSCLE
NOTHING MORE", he's not the benchmark for tennis these days anyway, isn't he? :lol: Nole beat Roger "The GOAT" Federer" both times he won a Slam and that should count for something as well, no? ;)
Defeating fed 1 1/2 times account for something yes,but in comparison to rafter who defeated Sampras/agassi while novak didn't beat nadull,as I said the comparison is pre-mature,but till now rafter is ahead on a competitive nature.

oranges
02-11-2011, 12:33 PM
I don't know if you ever heard of Pete Sampras, but he was a really good player. '97 was a mighty good year for him. Patrick Rafter - meh.... he was alright. He got lucky as all fuck he didn't have to play Pete at USO '97 cuz Pete would have cleaned his clock.

:lol: You give the word clown a whole new level of meaning. Well, at least it's Sampras this time. The last time Querrey was the American that muddled that brain cell of yours.

Nole fan
02-11-2011, 12:50 PM
An "obviously sick Rogie" who despite that terrible, life-threatening illness was still able to reach the semi finals of a Slam. :rolleyes: And Tsonga was the best player of that other half, not Nole's fault that he had to play him in the final. Djoker's AO win 2008 was as legit as his win in 2011 (and both were quite impressive I must say :worship:).

People have short memory. That clown of a player Tsonga just had to beat an in-form Nadal to reach the final against Nole. :rolleyes:

oranges
02-11-2011, 12:55 PM
Speaking for the entire board again, are we? Did you poll each and every registered user to see if they had any problem understanding Laurie's point?

Laurie clearly did not understand OP. Or maybe she just hasn't been around the block. Sports messages boards compare players of different eras all the time.

Here, try once more.

This thread I'm afraid does not make sense as one player is retired and the other has at least 6 years left at the top bar any serious injury.

A better comparison would be Rafter v Kafelnikov or Safin.

You basically have two choices here - either shut up or continue being more of an idiot.

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 01:37 PM
Another underestimate of Novak.

Not that talented, weak era, Fed mono... excuses, excuses...

Like grandma stories, everything was better in the past. Even that players from 90-era says that tennis today is atomic tennis... every era is better and better.

Inflation of threads in which some tards try to downgrade his second GS title. After last final somebody says that Murray is more talented... it's a joke.

Novak beat real GOAT 3 times in GS, what else?!

samjones
02-11-2011, 01:48 PM
:lol: You give the word clown a whole new level of meaning. Well, at least it's Sampras this time. The last time Querrey was the American that muddled that brain cell of yours.

Ah bigotry......

Haelfix
02-11-2011, 01:48 PM
Novak for sure.

Rafter was more dominant in the brief stint he had at the top (eg for about 2 years) and you could definitely say he was the best hard court player in the world at one time, however it didn't last very long and the rest of his career was defined by injury.

Novak meanwhile has gone up and done pretty well against two legends near the peak of their game and has had a more consistent career. He also might eventually be teh consensus best if Fedal declines a little more.

samjones
02-11-2011, 01:52 PM
An "obviously sick Rogie" who despite that terrible, life-threatening illness was still able to reach the semi finals of a Slam. :rolleyes: And Tsonga was the best player of that other half, not Nole's fault that he had to play him in the final. Djoker's AO win 2008 was as legit as his win in 2011 (and both were quite impressive I must say :worship:).

Nole beat an in-form Ferrer too.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 01:54 PM
Nole beat an in-form Ferrer too.

Rafter beat an in-form Chang and Rusedski....stop the biased shit.

oranges
02-11-2011, 02:01 PM
Ah bigotry......

Against my better judgment to continue entertaining the clown of clowns, but would you care to answer why Sampras lost if he was the best man in those weeks? Did the bad anti-Americans lock him up and prevent him from playing or did he just lose? Are you unable to understand the questions, just as with laurie's post, and that's why you can't respond to them? If so, that's fine, just say so.

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 02:06 PM
Compare of these two players is totally irrelevant.

Nole compete in the era of by far two most dominant players(excluding Sampras) in tennis history.

Nadal is unbeatable on clay, Novak was unlucky, 3SF against him, Rafa made mental scars both to Novak and Roger in all surface, it's really hard to find a little sun in that majorcian jungle.

He is only 23, give him a credit, he has another 6-7 years...after that, we may summ his result, and compare to others...

Vida
02-11-2011, 02:20 PM
:yeah:

thread closed.

oranges
02-11-2011, 02:25 PM
:yeah:

thread closed.

Why, because beating Sampras at USO was easier than beating Nadal should have been for Novak? Hilarious.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 02:27 PM
Compare of these two players is totally irrelevant.

Nole compete in the era of by far two most dominant players(excluding Sampras) in tennis history.

Nadal is unbeatable on clay, Novak was unlucky, 3SF against him, Rafa made mental scars both to Novak and Roger in all surface, it's really hard to find a little sun in that majorcian jungle.

He is only 23, give him a credit, he has another 6-7 years...after that, we may summ his result, and compare to others...

No. Lendl, Laver, Borg and Mac were all more 'dominant' than Nadal was in terms of being the king and the no 1.

Vida
02-11-2011, 02:32 PM
Why, because beating Sampras at USO was easier than beating Nadal should have been for Novak? Hilarious.

what?

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 02:41 PM
Why, because beating Sampras at USO was easier than beating Nadal should have been for Novak? Hilarious.

Why Nadal?!

He beats Federer 3 times, two times 3-0, and one in 5 set epic...

Nobody done that against Fed on HC GS, it's amazing achievement. First, there was a mono, second time he was lucky...what about third time...Olderer?! That is pathetic:o

From time to time, Novak stuck himself between Roger and Rafa, he can't challenge them in overall career, but this is enough to find his place in tennis history.

Vida
02-11-2011, 02:43 PM
mono shmono.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 02:44 PM
Fedal are not the greatest players ever, how many thickos trot this shit out :o

l_mac
02-11-2011, 02:49 PM
That clown of a player Tsonga just had to beat an in-form Nadal to reach the final against Nole. :rolleyes:

:haha:

People have short memories indeed.

:rolls:

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 02:53 PM
Fedal are not the greatest players ever, how many thickos trot this shit out :o

Ok, they are among greatest...

Fed is clearly the best ih titles, records, IMO overall game and talent.

Rafa has 5 more years if he avoid injuries.

What's your point?! Weak era, overrated players:confused:

Corey Feldman
02-11-2011, 02:58 PM
2 Wimbledon finals >>>>> none.

TennisOnWood
02-11-2011, 03:00 PM
Ok, they are among greatest...

Fed is clearly the best ih titles, records, IMO overall game and talent.

Rafa has 5 more years if he avoid injuries.

What's your point?! Weak era, overrated players:confused:

What titles?

Nole_1990
02-11-2011, 03:01 PM
:haha:

People have short memories indeed.

:rolls:

remind me which good in form player murray beat in his road to his 2 ao finals !!!

i know!!!! none

besides nole destroyed mugray in the final

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 03:03 PM
Ok, they are among greatest...

Fed is clearly the best ih titles, records, IMO overall game and talent.

Rafa has 5 more years if he avoid injuries.

What's your point?! Weak era, overrated players:confused:

Fed, Sampras and Laver are the greatest players. People make excuses for Djokovic, Murray etc that they're in the greatest era, but no one ever did it when Sampras stopped so many guys from winning slams, or when a talent like Mecir was denied in his finals.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 03:07 PM
remind me which good in form player murray beat in his road to his 2 ao finals !!!

i know!!!! none

besides nole destroyed mugray in the final

Nadal for two sets and Cilic.

l_mac
02-11-2011, 03:15 PM
remind me which good in form player murray beat in his road to his 2 ao finals !!!

i know!!!! none

besides nole destroyed mugray in the final

What? I was laughing at that poster saying Nadal was "in form" at AO '08. Arguably the worst period of his career.

samjones
02-11-2011, 03:18 PM
Against my better judgment to continue entertaining the clown of clowns, but would you care to answer why Sampras lost if he was the best man in those weeks? Did the bad anti-Americans lock him up and prevent him from playing or did he just lose? Are you unable to understand the questions, just as with laurie's post, and that's why you can't respond to them? If so, that's fine, just say so.

You should read the thread. I already said why I think Pete lost - he underestimated a very good low-seeded player. The guy that Pete lost to at USO won the next slam.

No doubt that Korda isn't in the same league as Pete, but in September '97 he was an under-ranked player who took Pete by surprise. What other explanation would you offer?

Magick
02-11-2011, 03:20 PM
very interesting comparison

as is hewitt v djokovic

and hewitt v rafter.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 03:24 PM
very interesting comparison

as is hewitt v djokovic

and hewitt v rafter.

No Hewitt is ahead of both, he dominated two years, spent 80 weeks at the no 1 spot and bagged two different GS (US Open and Wimbledon) and beat Sampras in one of those finals, a cracking effort, just carved the great man up.

Yeah he's not been a slam contender since 2006, but he suffered injuries and his style of play worn him out, he lost the power and the speed that made him one of the finest counterpunchers.

He had a peak of four years, 2001-05. Federer had a peak of four years too in all honesty, 2003-07, but his style of play is fitness-beneficial and has enabled him to keep going and bag a few more big'uns.

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 03:27 PM
What titles?

GS titles:cool:

Zagor
02-11-2011, 03:34 PM
You should read the thread. I already said why I think Pete lost - he underestimated a very good low-seeded player. The guy that Pete lost to at USO won the next slam.

No doubt that Korda isn't in the same league as Pete, but in September '97 he was an under-ranked player who took Pete by surprise. What other explanation would you offer?

LOL,Korda certainly didn't took Sampras by surprise and Pete sure as heck didn't underestimate him.Remember Korda already pushed Pete to 5 at Wimbledon(of all places)that very same year,you seriously think Pete forgot who he was by USO? You seem to think Pete is senile.

Korda was well known among other players to be a streaky player yes but also very dangerous when playing his best tenis,I don't think I've ever seen anyone hit so many BH winners at will when he was on.He played a fantastic match against Sampras to beat him at USO that year,he was passing Pete left and right and took huge cuts on the return of serve.Pete wasn't taken by surprise,he just faced a hot opponent and wasn't quite able to weather the storm although he was 3-0 up in the fifth set so he had his chances but things didn't quite go his way that time.

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 03:35 PM
Fed, Sampras and Laver are the greatest players. People make excuses for Djokovic, Murray etc that they're in the greatest era, but no one ever did it when Sampras stopped so many guys from winning slams, or when a talent like Mecir was denied in his finals.

I agree with you...

But you avoid the fact that nowdays you have 2 players that stopped other players to get some GS titles, and one of this two will be a GOAT fo so many years ahead(maybe both).

Because of that, today era is the strongest.

Nole_1990
02-11-2011, 03:39 PM
Nadal for two sets and Cilic.

cilic had played 3 5 sets in the road to his semifinal run

and nadal was injuried and couldn't move

and nothing proves this but the ao 2011 final
murray heading to the final having played just ferrer from the top 10 ( which is the easiest player on HC from the top 10 )

then in the final he was simply outclassed by classy djokovic

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 03:40 PM
I agree with you...

But you avoid the fact that nowdays you have 2 players that stopped other players to get some GS titles, and one of this two will be a GOAT fo so many years ahead(maybe both).

Because of that, today era is the strongest.

It's easy to say that, but today's surfaces are so similar it means these top guys do not need to change their games or try different tactics when they move from hard to clay to grass. The only strugglers on particular surfaces these days are the movers (Davydenko, Del Potro on grass) and Roddick on clay.

Whilst two guys dominate yes and make it tough, I could offer the alternative that back in Rafter's time, surfaces were so different, clay was slower, grass was faster and the different guys that specialised on both surfaces made winning RG and Wimbledon two entirely alien challenges.

l_mac
02-11-2011, 03:42 PM
and nadal was injuried and couldn't move


For 2 games.

Murray was already 2-0 up in sets when Rafa retired, and Rafa didn't get injured till the very end of the 2nd set. It was a really great match up to that point and Rafa's injury played no part in him losing either of the first two sets.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 03:43 PM
cilic had played 3 5 sets in the road to his semifinal run

and nadal was injuried and couldn't move

and nothing proves this but the ao 2011 final
murray heading to the final having played just ferrer from the top 10 ( which is the easiest player on HC from the top 10 )

then in the final he was simply outclassed by classy djokovic

Nadal moved fine and played well for TWO sets, Murray was better than him on the day- he injured himself in the TB at like 4-1 down.

Cilic was in form, the only match you could knock him for was not beating Borenard Tomic more easily.

Murray had a pissweak draw yeah, so what? Plenty of GS winners and finalists had some shite draws, look at Nadal RG, Wimby and USO last year. Or some of Djokovic's draws he's failed to take advantage of, losing to Melzer etc.

As for being outclassed, maybe so mentally, but Novak still only hit 5 winners more in a match whereby both men only played great in the first set (and Novak was better in that regard, then steadier in the last two)

l_mac
02-11-2011, 03:44 PM
It's easy to say that, but today's surfaces are so similar it means these top guys do not need to change their games or try different tactics when they move from hard to clay to grass.

But I think Federer and Nadal are the only two that do change their games, certainly between clay and grass, and they have won every Wimbledon/RG title since Wim 2004. So maybe the other players should change their games. Having said that, I don't think these academies that all the top players seem to come from nowadays help them with doing that.

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 03:54 PM
It's easy to say that, but today's surfaces are so similar it means these top guys do not need to change their games or try different tactics when they move from hard to clay to grass. The only strugglers on particular surfaces these days are the movers (Davydenko, Del Potro on grass) and Roddick on clay.

Whilst two guys dominate yes and make it tough, I could offer the alternative that back in Rafter's time, surfaces were so different, clay was slower, grass was faster and the different guys that specialised on both surfaces made winning RG and Wimbledon two entirely alien challenges.

It's true in that point of view, it's the matter of evolution in the game, things are changed, some for better, some for worse.

IMO grass was too fast in 90'ies, only serve, serve, some volleys...I prefer ground game, tactics, long rallies... we lose some unique tennis players, but we got more watchable game.

Accept the fact that someone prefer other styles...that gives us dynamics in disscusion...

samjones
02-11-2011, 03:57 PM
LOL,Korda certainly didn't took Sampras by surprise and Pete sure as heck didn't underestimate him.Remember Korda already pushed Pete to 5 at Wimbledon(of all places)that very same year,you seriously think Pete forgot who he was by USO? You seem to think Pete is senile.

Korda was well known among other players to be a streaky player yes but also very dangerous when playing his best tenis,I don't think I've ever seen anyone hit so many BH winners at will when he was on.He played a fantastic match against Sampras to beat him at USO that year,he was passing Pete left and right and took huge cuts on the return of serve.Pete wasn't taken by surprise,he just faced a hot opponent and wasn't quite able to weather the storm although he was 3-0 up in the fifth set so he had his chances but things didn't quite go his way that time.

Maybe you're right. There are players like that today - I would put Robin in that category. How good they are may be subject to much debate. On any given day they might walk out on the court and beat anybody.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 04:00 PM
It's true in that point of view, it's the matter of evolution in the game, things are changed, some for better, some for worse.

IMO grass was too fast in 90'ies, only serve, serve, some volleys...I prefer ground game, tactics, long rallies... we lose some unique tennis players, but we got more watchable game.

Accept the fact that someone prefer other styles...that gives us dynamics in disscusion...

Grass was very fast indeed, and favoured serves and volleys, but clay was super duper slow and there were so many heavy topspin grinders, long punishing rallies and point construction. That's what I loved, the contrast between both. Both were so different. It wasn't like grass was all year round either, it was still only in the four week period.

Then you had the neutral hardcourts where both were possible- baseline hitters Kafelnikov, Agassi and Courier won HC slams but so did fast courters like Sampras and Rafter.

That's what I loved about it. Each to their own of course, but I just feel too many of today's styles are... generic and similar. A serve-volleyer against a passing shot baseliner was always a great match to watch cause of the contrast, that's why I loved Sampras v Agassi matches.

oranges
02-11-2011, 04:04 PM
Why Nadal?!

He beats Federer 3 times, two times 3-0, and one in 5 set epic...

Nobody done that against Fed on HC GS, it's amazing achievement. First, there was a mono, second time he was lucky...what about third time...Olderer?! That is pathetic:o

From time to time, Novak stuck himself between Roger and Rafa, he can't challenge them in overall career, but this is enough to find his place in tennis history.

Because that was his chance to have three now and it was easier than beating Sampras was at the time. I'm just dismissing the stronger era claims, is all.

oranges
02-11-2011, 04:07 PM
You should read the thread. I already said why I think Pete lost - he underestimated a very good low-seeded player. The guy that Pete lost to at USO won the next slam.

No doubt that Korda isn't in the same league as Pete, but in September '97 he was an under-ranked player who took Pete by surprise. What other explanation would you offer?

Sampras wasn't the best player in those weeks, it's as simple as that. How long could you go on with this charade?

Nole fan
02-11-2011, 04:09 PM
It's true in that point of view, it's the matter of evolution in the game, things are changed, some for better, some for worse.

IMO grass was too fast in 90'ies, only serve, serve, some volleys...I prefer ground game, tactics, long rallies... we lose some unique tennis players, but we got more watchable game.

Accept the fact that someone prefer other styles...that gives us dynamics in disscusion...

This.

I wouldn't go back to the 90s to save my life. :tape:

NikolaBGD
02-11-2011, 04:12 PM
Grass was very fast indeed, and favoured serves and volleys, but clay was super duper slow and there were so many heavy topspin grinders, long punishing rallies and point construction. That's what I loved, the contrast between both. Both were so different. It wasn't like grass was all year round either, it was still only in the four week period.

Then you had the neutral hardcourts where both were possible- baseline hitters Kafelnikov, Agassi and Courier won HC slams but so did fast courters like Sampras and Rafter.

That's what I loved about it. Each to their own of course, but I just feel too many of today's styles are... generic and similar. A serve-volleyer against a passing shot baseliner was always a great match to watch cause of the contrast, that's why I loved Sampras v Agassi matches.

Very true...

Today, players are faster, evolution in defence is immence, passing also, can't return that old style, it's obsolete.

Above all, every era has own value, it's individual taste what you like...

Corey Feldman
02-11-2011, 04:18 PM
This.

I wouldn't go back to the 90s to save my life. :tape: We know, no guys as good looking as Nole in the 90's for your obnoxious tastes :zzz:

Mjau!
02-11-2011, 06:13 PM
An "obviously sick Rogie" who despite that terrible, life-threatening illness was still able to reach the semi finals of a Slam. :rolleyes: And Tsonga was the best player of that other half, not Nole's fault that he had to play him in the final. Djoker's AO win 2008 was as legit as his win in 2011 (and both were quite impressive I must say :worship:).

Sooo? Rafa has won tournaments despite injury! :rolleyes: Of course Roger can take advantage of weak draw and reach SF despite mononuclearosis.

samjones
02-11-2011, 06:39 PM
Sampras wasn't the best player in those weeks, it's as simple as that. How long could you go on with this charade?

Weeks... maybe months.

Anyway - my point was that Patrick Rafter simply lucked out in 97. He only had to face one seeded player the entire tournament - and that was Michael Chang and Rafter did win that one in good fashion - but that was it. Everybody else he faced was a bunch of nobodies or good players having a bad year.

Rafter's 97 USO victory may have been the most undeserved slam title in history - neck and neck with Gaudio's.

rocketassist
02-11-2011, 06:43 PM
Weeks... maybe months.

Anyway - my point was that Patrick Rafter simply lucked out in 97. He only had to face one seeded player the entire tournament - and that was Michael Chang and Rafter did win that one in good fashion - but that was it. Everybody else he faced was a bunch of nobodies or good players having a bad year.

Rafter's 97 USO victory may have been the most undeserved slam title in history - neck and neck with Gaudio's.

Fuck me, another one. Gaudio's draw was fucking rough as toast. Canas, Jiri Novak first two rounds, Enqvist (okay, not great on clay), an in form Andreev who had knocked the champion out, then Hewitt, Nalbandian and the best clay courter in the world at the time Guillermo Coria.

In the last year before Nadal arrived, that was probably as taxing a draw as a guy like Gaudio could face.

Mjau!
02-11-2011, 06:51 PM
Weeks... maybe months.

Anyway - my point was that Patrick Rafter simply lucked out in 97. He only had to face one seeded player the entire tournament - and that was Michael Chang and Rafter did win that one in good fashion - but that was it. Everybody else he faced was a bunch of nobodies or good players having a bad year.

Rafter's 97 USO victory may have been the most undeserved slam title in history - neck and neck with Gaudio's.

And the only good player Nole beat in O8 was sick Roger. How is that better? :rolleyes:

Also, please remove me from your sig, oki? :(

Nole_1990
02-11-2011, 07:19 PM
And the only good player Nole beat in O8 was sick Roger. How is that better? :rolleyes:

Also, please remove me from your sig, oki? :(

You forgot hewitt and ferrer

Mjau!
02-11-2011, 07:44 PM
You forgot hewitt and ferrer

They are not so good players. :shrug:

oranges
02-11-2011, 08:14 PM
Weeks... maybe months.

Anyway - my point was that Patrick Rafter simply lucked out in 97. He only had to face one seeded player the entire tournament - and that was Michael Chang and Rafter did win that one in good fashion - but that was it. Everybody else he faced was a bunch of nobodies or good players having a bad year.

Rafter's 97 USO victory may have been the most undeserved slam title in history - neck and neck with Gaudio's.

:haha: Well, arguing with you is beyond pointless so I'm just gonna say suck on it

munZe konZa
02-11-2011, 08:43 PM
Did Djokovic end his career already or is this comparison stupid?

Nole fan
02-12-2011, 02:07 AM
Did Djokovic end his career already or is this comparison stupid?

+1.
Absurd thread. :rolleyes:

Hewitt =Legend
02-12-2011, 02:10 AM
:haha: Well, arguing with you is beyond pointless so I'm just gonna say suck on it

Samjones in top form again after a couple of quiet weeks...

Seingeist
02-12-2011, 05:38 AM
A seemingly innocuous (if a bit pointless) thread descends almost immediately into ten pages of unbearably bitter, ignorant, and wrongheaded garbage.

MTF is the entity that is undergoing the "mug era." Good grief.

And samjones? What an absolute cretin this guy is. Pains me to see an American flag next to his name.

As so many have said, Djokovic's career is far from over, and he is all but certain to surpass Rafter, and probably by some margin.

samjones
02-12-2011, 12:03 PM
A seemingly innocuous (if a bit pointless) thread descends almost immediately into ten pages of unbearably bitter, ignorant, and wrongheaded garbage.

MTF is the entity that is undergoing the "mug era." Good grief.

And samjones? What an absolute cretin this guy is. Pains me to see an American flag next to his name.

As so many have said, Djokovic's career is far from over, and he is all but certain to surpass Rafter, and probably by some margin.

Maybe you should move to a different country. That would make you happier, me happier, and the United States of America happier.

I'm not sure why about half of the people on this forum can't grasp the very simple question OP posed. Whose career accomplishments are greater - Patrick Rafter's or Novak Djokovic's *to this point*.

Ya know, there's nothing that Guarantees Djokovic will ever play again. He may be dead at this moment - we may just not have heard the news.

These types of comparisons are done all day long on every sports message board you go to. I think some of you know fuck-all about sports in general.

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 12:14 PM
Maybe you should move to a different country. That would make you happier, me happier, and the United States of America happier.

I'm not sure why about half of the people on this forum can't grasp the very simple question OP posed. Whose career accomplishments are greater - Patrick Rafter's or Novak Djokovic's *to this point*.

Ya know, there's nothing that Guarantees Djokovic will ever play again. He may be dead at this moment - we may just not have heard the news.

These types of comparisons are done all day long on every sports message board you go to. I think some of you know fuck-all about sports in general.

Classy thing to say! :scared:

Oh and you ignored my Gaudio response..

samjones
02-12-2011, 12:26 PM
Classy thing to say! :scared:

Oh and you ignored my Gaudio response..

I ignored it because it didn't make any sense. Gaudio beat Coria and Nalbandian, I guess that's true. The other players he beat were either unseeded, low-seeded, or can't play for shit on clay. Rafa fixed that whole "Gaudio-caliber players are winning the French Open" problem.

The final was a great comeback. That's for sure.

BTW: I wasn't wishing death on Nole - just pointing out the utter idiocy in claiming that you can't compare Rafter to Nole because Nole is still playing. I'm glad I could put that flawed line of reasoning to bed and now we can move on.

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 12:38 PM
I ignored it because it didn't make any sense. Gaudio beat Coria and Nalbandian, I guess that's true. The other players he beat were either unseeded, low-seeded, or can't play for shit on clay. Rafa fixed that whole "Gaudio-caliber players are winning the French Open" problem.

The final was a great comeback. That's for sure.

BTW: I wasn't wishing death on Nole - just pointing out the utter idiocy in claiming that you can't compare Rafter to Nole because Nole is still playing. I'm glad I could put that flawed line of reasoning to bed and now we can move on.

Yeah Canas, Novak, Andreev, Hewitt, Nalbandian and Coria are all clay clowns. Nadal in 2006, 2007 and 2010 faced a MUCH harder draw :rolleyes:

Topspindoctor
02-12-2011, 12:51 PM
Yeah Canas, Novak, Andreev, Hewitt, Nalbandian and Coria are all clay clowns. Nadal in 2006, 2007 and 2010 faced a MUCH harder draw :rolleyes:

Nadal when healthy is invincible on clay. He makes any opponent look like a clown, so it's not a matter of this clay era being weak, it's Nadal being too good. If Nadal didn't exist, then RG would be won by different people in those years and clowns here would claim the clay era is strong because of that fact.

samjones
02-12-2011, 01:47 PM
Yeah Canas, Novak, Andreev, Hewitt, Nalbandian and Coria are all clay clowns. Nadal in 2006, 2007 and 2010 faced a MUCH harder draw :rolleyes:

Most of those players were simply not quality players in May '04 - not on clay, not on any surface. Jiri Novak's better days were definitely behind him. Lleyton Hewitt never really was a clay power-house.

Granted, David Nalbandian and Guilly were good player - but not really clay gods.

The 2 best clay players of that tournament - JCF and Roger Federer - Gaston didn't have to face them.

Bottom-line he just got really, really lucky.

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 02:52 PM
Most of those players were simply not quality players in May '04 - not on clay, not on any surface. Jiri Novak's better days were definitely behind him. Lleyton Hewitt never really was a clay power-house.

Granted, David Nalbandian and Guilly were good player - but not really clay gods.

The 2 best clay players of that tournament - JCF and Roger Federer - Gaston didn't have to face them.

Bottom-line he just got really, really lucky.

What, the same Federer who had never done fuck all at RG till a year later? The one who got smoked by Guga?

And a sick JCF who had no chance of winning again?

Stop the bullshit, it's fucking dumb. And Coria was class and the best clay courter of the year.

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 02:53 PM
Nadal when healthy is invincible on clay. He makes any opponent look like a clown, so it's not a matter of this clay era being weak, it's Nadal being too good. If Nadal didn't exist, then RG would be won by different people in those years and clowns here would claim the clay era is strong because of that fact.

WRONG.

Fed, Nole, Del Potro? Great exponents of the clay game. Would be no different.

samjones
02-12-2011, 03:09 PM
What, the same Federer who had never done fuck all at RG till a year later? The one who got smoked by Guga?

And a sick JCF who had no chance of winning again?

Stop the bullshit, it's fucking dumb. And Coria was class and the best clay courter of the year.

I see that you're not really able to talk about this without losing your temper.

Rog was the top seeded player and he had won a number of clay-court tournaments going into FO'04. I see no reason to retroactively assume he didn't have a chance.

JCF - sick? I honestly can't remember. What I do remember is that he was the best clay courter of that time and Gaudio didn't have to play him to take the FO title. And that's one of the many reasons I say that Gaudio go fuckin lucky.

tektonac
02-12-2011, 03:16 PM
delete this thread. Idiotic poll choices

agree + classless hater should be banned.

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 03:29 PM
I see that you're not really able to talk about this without losing your temper.

Rog was the top seeded player and he had won a number of clay-court tournaments going into FO'04. I see no reason to retroactively assume he didn't have a chance.

JCF - sick? I honestly can't remember. What I do remember is that he was the best clay courter of that time and Gaudio didn't have to play him to take the FO title. And that's one of the many reasons I say that Gaudio go fuckin lucky.

He had not won a single clay title in 04! Coria won Monte Carlo and reached the Hamburg final and Moya had won Rome. Boredo had won Barcelona. JCF had won nothing!

Fed won Hamburg which made him a contender yes, but Guga taught him a lesson and a half. Fed was not clear favourite to win that.

JCF had a virus, struggled past Haas, then got ripped by Andreev. Facing him was tougher than a half-fit JCF.

As for temper, I'm boss atm, not a problem la.

samjones
02-12-2011, 03:35 PM
agree + classless hater should be banned.

I think the real problem is that Oranges and some other posters think that anybody who disagrees with their opinion about tennis should be attacked and the thread should become a pissing contest. If they would learn to contain their anger about life they might learn a couple things about tennis.

Also some of the other posters who are constantly calling for threads to be deleted and for posters to be banned - people such as yourself - are really only doing the same thing. You think that you're the boss and you should be able to control what people talk about. It's inane and assholeish.

EnriqueIG8
02-12-2011, 03:35 PM
Djoko will not be a 2 slam wonder IMO.

So this discussion is irrelevant.

samjones
02-12-2011, 03:38 PM
He had not won a single clay title in 04! Coria won Monte Carlo and reached the Hamburg final and Moya had won Rome. Boredo had won Barcelona. JCF had won nothing!

Fed won Hamburg which made him a contender yes, but Guga taught him a lesson and a half. Fed was not clear favourite to win that.

JCF had a virus, struggled past Haas, then got ripped by Andreev. Facing him was tougher than a half-fit JCF.

As for temper, I'm boss atm, not a problem la.

Carlos Moya - now there was a great clay court player of the time. That's another one that Gaudio didn't have to contend with on his way to the '04 title.

JCF was sick is only more evidence that Gaudio was just fucking lucky. The stars aligned for him.

ballbasher101
02-12-2011, 03:40 PM
Rafter was good but as most have said the Djoker is destined for bigger things.

tektonac
02-12-2011, 03:49 PM
Also some of the other posters who are constantly calling for threads to be deleted and for posters to be banned - people such as yourself - are really only doing the same thing. You think that you're the boss and you should be able to control what people talk about. It's inane and assholeish.

you couldn't be more wrong. my suggestion is: contain stupidity, ignorance, hatred, jealousy, that's all. there are other and more positive ways to release frustration when your idol loses. obviously this was the wrong one, insulting a player who deserved to be praised for his achievement and not bashed for something he is not.

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 04:14 PM
Carlos Moya - now there was a great clay court player of the time. That's another one that Gaudio didn't have to contend with on his way to the '04 title.

JCF was sick is only more evidence that Gaudio was just fucking lucky. The stars aligned for him.

Because, Coria beat Moya in straight sets!

JCF was sick, but so was Federer at AO 08, does that make Djokovic lucky or not?

See what I just did there?

samjones
02-12-2011, 04:27 PM
you couldn't be more wrong. my suggestion is: contain stupidity, ignorance, hatred, jealousy, that's all. there are other and more positive ways to release frustration when your idol loses. obviously this was the wrong one, insulting a player who deserved to be praised for his achievement and not bashed for something he is not.

Maybe you should just accept the fact that people are going to say what they have to say and don't get your panties in a wad over it.

Did you ever think of that?

samjones
02-12-2011, 04:39 PM
Because, Coria beat Moya in straight sets!

JCF was sick, but so was Federer at AO 08, does that make Djokovic lucky or not?

See what I just did there?

"Player X was sick" is just rank excuse-making. Nole also beat a potent David Ferrer and an at-home Lleyton Hewitt on his way to that title. It's true that he did not have to beat Nadal and it's also true that Nole has yet to beat Rafa in a Major despite having 5 shots at it, but he certainly faced tough competition in AO '08 and in AO '11 and he dominated all the players he faced in both tournaments. It's hard to be critical of Nole's '11 win because Rafa gets injured all the time for no reason.

It's not like every player worth a shit fell out of his way like Rafter '97 and it's not like the entire field had some excuse for losing to some other player like Gaudio '04 (except Coria, who somehow gave away a decisive win in the final.)

tektonac
02-12-2011, 04:42 PM
Maybe you should just accept the fact that people are going to say what they have to say and don't get your panties in a wad over it.

Did you ever think of that?

you are my enlighter now officially and you've been added to the worshipping list of mine. thank you. who said america is all about burgers and fries?

samjones
02-12-2011, 04:49 PM
you are my enlighter now officially and you've been added to the worshipping list of mine. thank you. who said america is all about burgers and fries?

We got Free Speech here in America. More than you can say there in the suburbs of Detroit and Buffalo and Seattle.

I'll help you understand. If you don't agree with something that someone says - challenge their facts or seek clarification. Don't flip out and call them names and demand that they be banned. It's not that hard.

Threads like this get started all the time. Who's better, Kevin Durant or Allan Iverson? Who's better, Barry Sanders or OJ Simpson? Who's better, Joe Frazier in the 60's or Marvin Hagler in the 80's? Nobody knows. Nobody can know. It's just a way to talk about the sport. Don't worry about who gets offended. No professional tennis players read this message board. And if any of them do, I'll tell them to get their fucking head on straight next time before they go out on the court (you know I'm talking to you Andy).

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 05:07 PM
"Player X was sick" is just rank excuse-making. Nole also beat a potent David Ferrer and an at-home Lleyton Hewitt on his way to that title. It's true that he did not have to beat Nadal and it's also true that Nole has yet to beat Rafa in a Major despite having 5 shots at it, but he certainly faced tough competition in AO '08 and in AO '11 and he dominated all the players he faced in both tournaments. It's hard to be critical of Nole's '11 win because Rafa gets injured all the time for no reason.

It's not like every player worth a shit fell out of his way like Rafter '97 and it's not like the entire field had some excuse for losing to some other player like Gaudio '04 (except Coria, who somehow gave away a decisive win in the final.)

You're criticising Gaudio's win cause JCF is injured. Why can't I do the same with Federer in 08 and Nadal in 11. You can't have it both ways.

Hewitt in 08 is way past it and Ferrer is nothing wonderful on a hardcourt, achieved nothing of note, no big tournament wins.

Gaudio came through a tough field in 04. The quality of players like Safin, Nalbandian, Kuerten, Federer, Moya and Coria made this a difficult field.

And for you to say Jiri Novak was a shit clay courter despite beating Fed in five set final on clay tells the story.

samjones
02-12-2011, 05:24 PM
You're criticising Gaudio's win cause JCF is injured. Why can't I do the same with Federer in 08 and Nadal in 11. You can't have it both ways.

Hewitt in 08 is way past it and Ferrer is nothing wonderful on a hardcourt, achieved nothing of note, no big tournament wins.

Gaudio came through a tough field in 04. The quality of players like Safin, Nalbandian, Kuerten, Federer, Moya and Coria made this a difficult field.

And for you to say Jiri Novak was a shit clay courter despite beating Fed in five set final on clay tells the story.

David Ferrer has never won any big tournament on any surface. He has had success on hard courts similar to his successes on clay.

'04 seemed to be the beginning of the end for Jiri. I don't know that I want to insult the man's career - but I wouldn't say a win against him that year would have meant too much.

Marat was definitely a force in '04. There's another great player Gaudio didn't have to face to claim that crown.

In a way I think Gaston Gaudio is a hero. He shows that anyone can achieve greatness with luck and perseverance.

BTW: I would say Hewitt '08 is just "past it". Hewitt '11 is *WAY PAST IT*. I'm glad he lost to JMDP. It would be hard to face the prospect of a great like Lleyton getting his ass handed to him by a kid like Milos. It's time for Lleyton to step down.

Feel free to continue to share your opinions about tennis - that's what I'm here to talk about and I appreciate the company. I'm not here to call you names or bad rep you, like you do to me. I'm not here to be a punching bag though. You feel entitled to give me a piece of your mind you might just read a few things in return.

You'll notice those red dots by my name. Why don't you go check your User CP now and see how many time I bad repped you.

Might give you a little perspective.

Allez
02-12-2011, 06:39 PM
Never heard of a 2 slam wonder before. What is Nadal a 9 slam wonder ? Roger a 16 slam wonder ?

rocketassist
02-12-2011, 07:09 PM
David Ferrer has never won any big tournament on any surface. He has had success on hard courts similar to his successes on clay.

'04 seemed to be the beginning of the end for Jiri. I don't know that I want to insult the man's career - but I wouldn't say a win against him that year would have meant too much.

Marat was definitely a force in '04. There's another great player Gaudio didn't have to face to claim that crown.

In a way I think Gaston Gaudio is a hero. He shows that anyone can achieve greatness with luck and perseverance.

BTW: I would say Hewitt '08 is just "past it". Hewitt '11 is *WAY PAST IT*. I'm glad he lost to JMDP. It would be hard to face the prospect of a great like Lleyton getting his ass handed to him by a kid like Milos. It's time for Lleyton to step down.

Feel free to continue to share your opinions about tennis - that's what I'm here to talk about and I appreciate the company. I'm not here to call you names or bad rep you, like you do to me. I'm not here to be a punching bag though. You feel entitled to give me a piece of your mind you might just read a few things in return.

You'll notice those red dots by my name. Why don't you go check your User CP now and see how many time I bad repped you.

Might give you a little perspective.

Lid, I wasn't doing it in anger or abuse, I did it to be funny, to take the piss.

samjones
02-12-2011, 07:29 PM
Lid, I wasn't doing it in anger or abuse, I did it to be funny, to take the piss.

Yeah, well I'm here talking about tennis. You may believe my opinions to be 100% wrong, but you can't deny that I'm talking about the tennis I watched and my memories of the events (with a little help from atpworldtour.com)

There are any number of uptight assholes here on MTF who quickly take a simple disagreement about tennis to a personal level. Don't be one of them.

I never rep anybody. The moderators would reprimand me for daring to write what I think about this who "red dot/green dot" bullshit - but let me just say that the guys who pay the most attention to those fucking dots are the same guys who post to the "Male Player Bulges" thread.

MIMIC
02-12-2011, 07:52 PM
2 slam wonder? WTF

allpro
02-13-2011, 12:13 PM
Sampras wasn't the best player in those weeks, it's as simple as that. How long could you go on with this charade?

Weeks... maybe months.

Anyway - my point was that Patrick Rafter simply lucked out in 97. He only had to face one seeded player the entire tournament - and that was Michael Chang and Rafter did win that one in good fashion - but that was it. Everybody else he faced was a bunch of nobodies or good players having a bad year.

What, the same Federer who had never done fuck all at RG till a year later? The one who got smoked by Guga?
And a sick JCF who had no chance of winning again?
Stop the bullshit, it's fucking dumb. And Coria was class and the best clay courter of the year.

I see that you're not really able to talk about this without losing your temper.

comedy gold :lol:


Yeah, well I'm here talking about tennis. You may believe my opinions to be 100% wrong, but you can't deny that I'm talking about the tennis I watched and my memories of the events (with a little help from atpworldtour.com)

There are any number of uptight assholes here on MTF who quickly take a simple disagreement about tennis to a personal level. Don't be one of them.

I never rep anybody. The moderators would reprimand me for daring to write what I think about this who "red dot/green dot" bullshit - but let me just say that the guys who pay the most attention to those fucking dots are the same guys who post to the "Male Player Bulges" thread.

well said.

Everko
03-28-2011, 08:12 PM
Djokovic won't be a 2 slam after this year. He will be a 4 slam wonder.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-28-2011, 10:42 PM
no way jokes beats nadal at RG or wimby

no way man- nadal needs to get injured for that to happen

on a fast hard court federer is better than djokovic- even if he is riding a wave of confidence right now.

tnosugar
03-28-2011, 10:47 PM
Djokovic should reach or surpass Lendl's heights, and leave Rafter waaaaaaaaay....waaaaay behind him. A tiny speck on that second ladder. As things stand now.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-28-2011, 11:01 PM
rafter is way underrated here

his classic serve and volley was a joy to behold, and is severely missed in the current era of bore-athons from the baseline

in the 90s you didn't hope for an UE, you took the point by the scruff of the neck and won it

agressive super fed 2005 could do that from the baseline

super rafa 2008 could do that on even clay!

djokovic will never be a lendl, and honestly there's a good argument for saying rafter was a better match-day player than lendl- maybe he didn't have the achievement career wise, but on his day he could beat almost anyone

Time Violation
03-28-2011, 11:06 PM
maybe he didn't have the achievement career wise, but on his day he could beat almost anyone

Well, the same could be said for many players, Nalbandian for one, and some more could probably beat pretty much anyone when really 'on fire' :)

tnosugar
03-28-2011, 11:10 PM
rafter is way underrated here

his classic serve and volley was a joy to behold, and is severely missed in the current era of bore-athons from the baseline

in the 90s you didn't hope for an UE, you took the point by the scruff of the neck and won it

agressive super fed 2005 could do that from the baseline

super rafa 2008 could do that on even clay!

djokovic will never be a lendl, and honestly there's a good argument for saying rafter was a better match-day player than lendl- maybe he didn't have the achievement career wise, but on his day he could beat almost anyone

sorry. it's the achievements that count. many players played great tennis, but couldn't cut it when it mattered. Djokovic included for a long time. I actually liked the aesthetics of his game better in late 2007 and AO 2008 compared to now. At present he is all rational and minimal (like Lendl). But this will soon evolve to all-round beautiful, if for some reason he doesn't relapse, but I can't (won't) see it happening.
He has defined and crystalised his core game. Now he can experiment, hone and refine. Just like Fed and Nadal have done.

fast_clay
03-28-2011, 11:10 PM
it must be said that rafter didnt acheive the retirement slam, which is regrettable and something djokovic acheived very early on in his career...

l_mac
03-28-2011, 11:13 PM
it must be said that rafter didnt acheive the retirement slam, which is regrettable and something djokovic acheived very early on in his career...

I think Nole is still waiting on the US Open retirement. Although, take nothing away from the kid, he had 3/4 at age 21. Impressive.

fast_clay
03-28-2011, 11:16 PM
I think Nole is still waiting on the US Open retirement. Although, take nothing away from the kid, he had 3/4 at age 21. Impressive.

i did wonder as i wrote, however, i stand corrected... such is his prowess these days i overstated his achievements... it is an easy mistake to make in eras of domination... margins seem blurred... legends seem bigger...

xargon
03-28-2011, 11:18 PM
Never heard of a 2 slam wonder before. What is Nadal a 9 slam wonder ? Roger a 16 slam wonder ?

It's just a Nole hater thread. When he wins three, they will find someone with three and ask who is better. LOL

rocketassist
03-28-2011, 11:22 PM
It's just a Nole hater thread. When he wins three, they will find someone with three and ask who is better. LOL

And that will be Guga, who is indeed better.

ssin
03-29-2011, 09:02 AM
I voted Rafter just to honour a good retired player :angel:

Go Novak ;)

ApproachShot
03-29-2011, 10:58 AM
As much as I like Rafter, I voted for Djokovic. I still would put Rafter marginally ahead, but by year end I fully expect Djokovic to have overtaken him.

theblejach
03-29-2011, 06:52 PM
Djoker!

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
06-02-2011, 04:43 AM
Rafter and its not even close


agreed ;)

stewietennis
06-02-2011, 06:19 AM
I think the two US Opens during the Sampras/Agassi years is a bit better than two Aussie Opens during the Federer/Nadal period (taking into account Fed had mono in one, and Nadal isn't really a HC player)

I believe the Australian Open logo has an outline of Pat Rafter serving.

Pirata.
06-02-2011, 06:42 AM
it must be said that rafter didnt acheive the retirement slam, which is regrettable and something djokovic acheived very early on in his career...

I think Nole is still waiting on the US Open retirement. Although, take nothing away from the kid, he had 3/4 at age 21. Impressive.

:lol:

Doesn't he have two at AO? Retirement slam on all surfaces by age 21, Fedal wishes they had these skills.

Stefanos13
06-02-2011, 06:43 AM
There isn't such a thing as a 2-slam wonder!

LawrenceOfTennis
06-02-2011, 06:45 AM
I love Rafter's style and personality.

Super Djoker
06-02-2011, 10:25 AM
Considering Djokovic is 24 this thread is bludy loonacy! Djokovic in the Semis of all 4 slams plus 2 4 finals and 2 Grand Slams! at 24 he is bound to overtake Rafter! don,t know really how you can compare them , as we are talking 2 completely different eras! I know very little about Rafter! But at 24 with 2 Slams already I have to say Djokovic will overtake Rafta!

Super Djoker
06-02-2011, 10:29 AM
Djokovic will definelty overtake Rafter He is 24 and looking good to win a third Slam Sooner or later!

Corey Feldman
06-02-2011, 10:33 AM
love the title

Alcibiades
06-02-2011, 02:49 PM
Never heard of a 2 slam wonder before. What is Nadal a 9 slam wonder ? Roger a 16 slam wonder ?

Best post in a shitty thread(surprise,surprise).

Nole fan
06-02-2011, 03:16 PM
Allez is the only good poster in GM. :cool:

ad-out
06-02-2011, 04:47 PM
I don't think Djokovic will be a two slam wonder. But Safin should have been in the poll. ;)

yesh222
06-02-2011, 05:59 PM
Like with the ridiculous Wilander thread, you really can't compare who is better between eras. Djokovic is already more accomplished than Rafter though.

bright
06-02-2011, 06:14 PM
Did this Rafter guy have Nole-like streak?
Did this Rafter guy write a monography concerning his first slam?
Had they been of the same era, I still fear this Rafter guy would have matched Nole's altitude.

Sham Kay
06-02-2011, 06:18 PM
On a separate note.. how cool would the name Novak Rafter be? Christ that's cool. Would be the name of my first born child in a less overbearingly scrutinizing world.

oranges
06-02-2011, 06:31 PM
Did this Rafter guy write a monography concerning his first slam?


This is seriously hurting Pat's legacy. Classy git :lol:

l_mac
06-02-2011, 09:57 PM
Both have big female fanbases.


:lol:

Novak isn't seen as a heartthrob (for obvious reasons)

I prefer Rafter :hearts: Far more charasmatic. Rafter >>>>>>>> Nole.

Nole fan
06-02-2011, 09:58 PM
On a separate note.. how cool would the name Novak Rafter be? Christ that's cool. Would be the name of my first born child in a less overbearingly scrutinizing world.

:lol:

I always thought Nolvak was the most beautiful name and not because of Novak. :shrug:

TheRafaelNadal
06-02-2011, 09:59 PM
Rafter was a joke.

stewietennis
06-02-2011, 10:14 PM
I don't think Djokovic will be a two slam wonder. But Safin should have been in the poll. ;)

Safin with his USO and Aussie. Hewitt with his USO and Wimbledon. Rafter with two USO. Djoko with two Aussies. Ilie Nastase with his USO and FO. Throw in Guga with his three FOs. Who has had a greater career?

cajuntennis
06-03-2011, 02:09 AM
Everyone is saying Djokovic because he is the current player but Rafter was clearly better

Sri
06-03-2011, 02:33 AM
Umm.. Djoke's young. He'll win many more slams. Very soon this Raftermug won't belong to Nole's league.

Nole fan
06-03-2011, 09:37 AM
:lol:

Novak isn't seen as a heartthrob (for obvious reasons)

I prefer Rafter :hearts: Far more charasmatic. Rafter >>>>>>>> Nole.

Obviously you're known in this forum for having the worst taste. Don't let your hatred blind you. You're too 'smart' for that. :hug:

JustDoIt
06-03-2011, 03:32 PM
Is this a joke thread ?

Auscon
06-03-2011, 04:27 PM
Djokovic should comfortably surpass Pat's achievements, but Rafters game was just a thing of beauty.

I'd rather watch Pat's game any day of the week.

Auscon
06-03-2011, 04:30 PM
On a separate note.. how cool would the name Novak Rafter be? Christ that's cool. Would be the name of my first born child in a less overbearingly scrutinizing world.

Better than Pat Djokovic atleast!

LawrenceOfTennis
06-05-2011, 07:21 AM
Rafter. No doubt. At least for me. I mean his slams were fantastic achievements, considering prior to his 1st USO title he has won only one atp title.

Dougie
06-05-2011, 07:43 AM
Rafter. No doubt. At least for me. I mean his slams were fantastic achievements, considering prior to his 1st USO title he has won only one atp title.

And after his 2nd US Open he only won three ( 2 X s´hertogenbosch + Indianapolis). So success-wise his career was really short, he had one dream run at 1998 US Open series, winning Toronto, Cincinnati, Long Island and US Open, but he only won a total of 11 titles in his career. That´s not much, Djokovic has wone 7 since this January. Who´s better, Djokovic or Rafter will not even be debatable soon, since Djokovic will surpass RAfter in every aspect. And I´m a huge fan of Rafter, his game was a beautiful, and he was a great fighter on court, I wish he´d won at least one WImbledon. But his achievements are somewhat over-glorified at MTF, maybe due to his beautiful game, likeable character and heartthrob looks.

Shinoj
10-15-2011, 10:47 AM
Epic Fail thread.